EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
- Victory in Seattle as Teachers Win Battle in Standardized Test Boycott
Popular content
Today's Top News
Exposed: The Arab Agenda in Syria
Here's a crash course on the "democratic" machinations of the Arab League - rather the GCC League, as real power in this pan-Arab organization is wielded by two of the six Persian Gulf monarchies composing the Gulf Cooperation Council, also known as Gulf Counter-revolution Club; Qatar and the House of Saud.![](/sites/commondreams.org/files/resize/imce-images/arab_league-325x216.jpg "Nabil Elaraby, Secretary General of the Arab League, looks on at a United Nations Security Council meeting on the crisis in Syria. Russia has clashed with Western powers and the Arab League over their demand that the United Nations take immediate action to stop Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's "killing machine." (AFP Photo/Mario Tama)")
Nabil Elaraby, Secretary General of the Arab League, looks on at a United Nations Security Council meeting on the crisis in Syria. Russia has clashed with Western powers and the Arab League over their demand that the United Nations take immediate action to stop Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's "killing machine." (AFP Photo/Mario Tama)
Essentially, the GCC created an Arab League group to monitor what's going on in Syria. The Syrian National Council - based in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries Turkey and France - enthusiastically supported it. It's telling that Syria's neighbor Lebanon did not.
When the over 160 monitors, after one month of enquiries, issued their report ... surprise! The report did not follow the official GCC line - which is that the "evil" Bashar al-Assad government is discriminately, and unilaterally, killing its own people, and so regime change is in order.
The Arab League's Ministerial Committee had approved the report, with four votes in favor (Algeria, Egypt, Sudan and GCC member Oman) and only one against; guess who, Qatar - which is now presiding the Arab League because the emirate bought their (rotating) turn from the Palestinian Authority.
So the report was either ignored (by Western corporate media) or mercilessly destroyed - by Arab media, virtually all of it financed by either the House of Saud or Qatar. It was not even discussed - because it was prevented by the GCC from being translated from Arabic into English and published in the Arab League's website.
Until it was leaked. Here it is, in full.
The report is adamant. There was no organized, lethal repression by the Syrian government against peaceful protesters. Instead, the report points to shady armed gangs as responsible for hundreds of deaths among Syrian civilians, and over one thousand among the Syrian army, using lethal tactics such as bombing of civilian buses, bombing of trains carrying diesel oil, bombing of police buses and bombing of bridges and pipelines.
Once again, the official NATOGCC version of Syria is of a popular uprising smashed by bullets and tanks. Instead, BRICS members Russia and China, and large swathes of the developing world see it as the Syrian government fighting heavily armed foreign mercenaries. The report largely confirms these suspicions.
The Syrian National Council is essentially a Muslim Brotherhood outfit affiliated with both the House of Saud and Qatar - with an uneasy Israel quietly supporting it in the background. Legitimacy is not exactly its cup of green tea. As for the Free Syrian Army, it does have its defectors, and well-meaning opponents of the Assad regime, but most of all is infested with these foreign mercenaries weaponized by the GCC, especially Salafist gangs.
Still NATOGCC, blocked from applying in Syria its one-size-fits-all model of promoting "democracy" by bombing a country and getting rid of the proverbial evil dictator, won't be deterred. GCC leaders House of Saud and Qatar bluntly dismissed their own report and went straight to the meat of the matter; impose a NATOGCC regime change via the UN Security Council.
So the current "Arab-led drive to secure a peaceful end to the 10-month crackdown" in Syria at the UN is no less than a crude regime change drive. Usual suspects Washington, London and Paris have been forced to fall over themselves to assure the real international community this is not another mandate for NATO bombing - a la Libya. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described it as "a path for a political transition that would preserve Syria's unity and institutions".
But BRICS members Russia and China see it for what it is. Another BRICS member - India - alongside Pakistan and South Africa, have all raised serious objections to the NATOGCC-peddled draft UN resolution.
There won't be another Libya-style no fly zone; after all the Assad regime is not exactly deploying Migs against civilians. A UN regime change resolution will be blocked - again - by Russia and China. Even NATOGCC is in disarray, as each block of players - Washington, Ankara, and the House of Saud-Doha duo - has a different long-term geopolitical agenda. Not to mention crucial Syrian neighbor and trading partner Iraq; Baghdad is on the record against any regime change scheme.
So here's a suggestion to the House of Saud and Qatar; since you're so seduced by the prospect of "democracy" in Syria, why don't you use all your American weaponry and invade in the dead of night - like you did to Bahrain - and execute regime change by yourselves?
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
28 Comments so far
Show AllI must thank CD staff for republishing this item. I also urge them to take a hard look at MK Bhadrakumar's blog entries and ATOL articles as they provide a perspective lacking from Western publications, http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/ For example, his latest pokes fun in a manner different from Greenwald at David Ignatius's most recent call for war:
" We don’t miss out on David Ignatius, because he is believed to be wired into the US security establishment. He can go seriously wrong - for example, on Pakistan’s ISI or the Afghan war - but we should still read him so that we can read between his lines. Indeed, DI’s column in today’s WaPo weighing the prospects of an Israeli military strike on Iran makes strange reading."
But it's this info that warrants him being read: "Divested of western propaganda, Iranian revolution enjoys a substantial social base. Also, the Islamic revolution represents national aspirations which are embedded deep in Iran’s social and political history. The great social mobility that the revolution generated makes its foundations virtually unshakeable. The self-styled Iran analysts and pro-Israeli polemists in the US who are a dime a dozen today cannot comprehend this."
That paragraph is then followed with this gem that you won't find in any Western publication: "The Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs in Harvard recently published a masterly policy brief titled 'Attacking Iran: Lessons from the Iran-Iraq War'. In sum, Iran is probably one of a handful of countries today which have the capacity to switch back and forth from a conventional war to a 'people’s war'. If Saddam Hussein were alive, he could have advised the Americans and the Israelis about the hazards of getting entangled in Iran’s 'people’s war'." http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/21698/attacking_iran.html?breadcrumb=%2F
I too would like to thank the CD staff for posting this article. We get so many middle of the road dead armadillo lesser of two evils articles here on CD, an Escobar article really changes the tone. Maybe a little Michel Chossudovsky next.
Exactly!
Agreed. Chossudovsky et al would be much appreciated to "round out" a stronger left voice on CD.
I'll third the thanks for this article. ;)
CD at its best is -in part- a wonderful tool for accessing a mix of foreign and alternative news/analysis sources such as this right along side thoughtful and wide ranging (on the left) opinion pieces and ground-level, grassroots news and info.
If we could get a real forum going (profiles, histories, clickable html, etc.) this place would be heaven. :)
It has been difficult to convince myself to donate much here lately, an announcement of such a forum-plan would turn me into a $20-a-month supporter instantaneously.
/end threadjack ;)
Ummm, did someone forget to tell Mr. Escobar that Russia and China are "evil", and so what they're against we must be for? ;)
good work pepe, as always
pepe finishes with "So here's a suggestion to the House of Saud and Qatar; since you're so seduced by the prospect of "democracy" in Syria, why don't you use all your American weaponry and invade in the dead of night - like you did to Bahrain - and execute regime change by yourselves?"
maybe saudi arabia and qatar could invade themselves if they are truly interested in democracy cause last time i looked they were two bit theocracies run by inbred arabs every bit as weird and reptilian as the old bag in london - queen whats her name
"maybe saudi arabia and qatar could invade themselves if they are truly interested in democracy"
medmedude - You took the words right out of my mouth, or word processor, as the case may be. Thanks!
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/world/middleeast/syria-homs-death-toll-said-to-rise.html
{“What more do we need to know to act decisively in the Security Council?” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton asked at a news conference in Munich. “To block this resolution is to bear responsibility for the horrors that are occurring on the ground in Syria.”
Responding to the Russian foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, who asked, “What’s the endgame?” Mrs. Clinton replied: “The endgame in the absence of us acting together as the international community, I fear, is civil war.”}
i hate to agree w/ one of my least favorite american politicans, but it seems like it already is a civil war.
the problem i see is that any opposition to a perceived western enemy will be (is) co-opted immediately by western powers (so the western elites are actually very pleased beneath the surface). it's problematic b/c there undoubtedly is indigenous animosity to the assad regime.
i can try to frame it a different way...
as america deteriorates - as we lose more rights - will americans in the future reject arms (if offered) in a revolutionary struggle if those guns come w/ strings attached to them ? but are essential if people are to resist (what they perceive to be) a tyrannical government.
i believe clinton clearly understood that the end game isn't a civil war; but that the endgame in syria is merely the prelude to further american/israeli aggresion in the region. the puppetmasters want a lockdown on the oil fields. the road to iran goes through syria. the russian envoy to the UN meant the larger game. in that game (insensitive and inhumane) the american motion in the UN (a mandate by UNSC) is a direct threat to russian and ultimately chinese interests.
full text of UN resolution...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-bc-un--un-syria-resolutiontext,0,6082804.story
another sad aspect of this unfolding story is america's hypocrisy vis a vis israel. where was america when over 1,400 palestinians were murdered by american armed israelis ? there wasn't a civil war unfolding in gaza at the time. most of the casualties were civilians. there was no talk in the fledgling obama administration of sanctions or reprisals (threats of US/NATO airstrikes).
the chinese and russians are not blind to american hypocrisy. had the US been sincere and reeled in it's abusive murderous client state, the russians and chinese may have acted differently in regards to syria. as it stands, they clearly see the american hypocrisy and understand the ramifications of the creation of another western state in the region.
it's also not a coincidence that syria is being destabilized as the rhetoric towards iran is intensifying.
...peace...
It's articles like this that ruin things for decent, well-meaning Amerikan liberal interventionists!
I mean, here the hegemonic Amerikan/NATO/Arab League leadership is trying to bring off Libya, Part Deux-- rallying behind the valiant but beleaguered Syrian masses in their attempt to throw off the yoke of villainous tyranny and repression and institute, or reclaim, Western-style democracy.
Or so it would have everyone believe.
Then here comes Escobar with factual, shrewd analysis that just flies in the face of the wholesome, upbeat family fare spewing daily from the government-corporate mass-media Consent Manufacturing combine.
Boo on you, Mr. Escobar! Your troublesome counter-narrative will only ruin the prospective feel-good hit of Spring, 2012.
As RT pointed out recently, just as in Libya, we have the US and Wahhabi Islamic militants back on the same side like their last honeymoon of the 1980s. The same people and weapons that are causing havoc and massacring hundreds of people in Iraq every month are now in Syria. Also, Syria is the last secular regime and last bastion of Arab Christianity which has been almost eradicated from Iraq.
Plus we have the spectacle of Al-Jazeera descending into a propaganda mouthpiece for this new alliance, getting its marching orders from its owner, the emir of Qatar. Things can't get more cynical.
This is pro-Assad regime propaganda! No evidence of Syrian government massacres???? give me a break, at least read the real news:
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2012/01/whats-happening-syria-2
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/02/03-7
http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/03/world/meast/syria-unrest/index.html
Stalinist scum!
According to your reading of Mr. Escobar's paper the reporters from the GCC are Stalinist scum.
I agree that we have to look critically at the question of Syrian government violence and repression. I note that Escobar chooses his words very carefully:
" The report is adamant. There was no organized, lethal repression by the Syrian government against peaceful protesters. Instead, the report points to shady armed gangs as responsible for hundreds of deaths among Syrian civilians, and over one thousand among the Syrian army..."
The operative phrase there is "peaceful protesters". Thus, we see in the report (see Escobar's PDF link), for example, that "the observers witnessed acts of violence perpetrated by Government forces and an exchange of gunfire with armed elements in Homs and Hama. "
The report in Mother Jones you linked says: "Update, Feb. 3: On Friday, multiple reports from activists inside Syria described massive shelling and an army offensive in the central Syrian city of Homs. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights puts the casualty figure at over a hundred, and claims many hundreds more are injured; other estimates have the body count at 200 and climbing. Activists report that "nail bombs" were used by the army during a mortar attack on the Khaldiyeh neighborhood."
So, it not at all a given that we are dealing with peaceful protesters rather than armed and violent resistance groups.
On the other hand, the Syrian government appears to be committing war crimes by indiscriminately shelling civilian neighborhoods, using disproportionate force. Peaceful protesters may be victims also.
What is clear is that reports in the MSM are one-sided and propagandistic, for the reasons Escobar outlines.
I think we need to keep an open-mind here, employ critical thinking, and avoid hasty, ideology-driven judgments.
Syrian Forces kill more than 200 in Homs
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m85388&hd=&size=1&l=e
Two comments on the article you linked:
1) The article itself says reports of widespread civilian killings "could not be independently confirmed." The information is coming from "opposition groups."
2) The article does not provide information on whether or not the revolt in Homs involves violent armed groups, nor does it investigate their aims, external support etc.
See my comments above on the issue of disproportionate force and war crimes.
None of the above should be taken as an endorsement to the Syrian government. I do think we need to take a critical look at the true motives and aims of all parties involved. Escobar is making a positive contribution to that effort, imo. Of course, his word isn't the last one.
Thanks CD for printing an analysis by Pepe Escobar.
I would assume thenUSA/Israel provoked an uprising with mercenaries and some civilians are joining in. And that the Syrian military, the western mercenaries are both killing civilians.
Yes, FINALLY we are getting a progressive analysis on Syria here at CD. I have been getting increasingly frustrated at the lack of this. Commondreams staff - please also publish articles from Jeremy Salt. Outstanding. I strongly recommend that people read the full Arab League report. It looks very authentic. It's not surprising that it has been dismissed in the media however, especially since the report specifically mentions the falsehoods and distortions being heavily propagated by MSM. If anyone has a way to get through to Democracy Now, please tell them to interview Pepe and Jeremy Salt for a reality check. DN has been uncharacteristically poor on this issue.
"DN has been uncharacteristically poor on this issue."
Agreed, and strongly with Libya reporting as well.
I might add that Goodman who is known for this following quote, appears to be strongly paralleling the Admin's "humanitarian wars" intervention doctrine on Libya/Syria through Goodman's editorial/content lens on DN:
"I really do think that if for one week in the United States we saw the true face of war, we saw people's limbs sheared off, we saw kids blown apart, for one week, war would be eradicated. Instead, what we see in the U.S. media is the video war game. Our mission is to make dissent commonplace in America."
After DN! / Amy G's totally 'main-stream' position on FUK-US NATO's assault on Libya, I haven't bothered to see what her take has been on Syria. IMO- It should be noted that Amy G did an April 2007 interview w ex-NATO-Gen Wesley Clark where he talked specifically about the NeoCON plan [since at-least in the aftermath of 9-11-2001] to attack &/or take down the regimes in IRAQ, LIBYA, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, IRAN & SYRIA! - Again she got it straight from the horse's mouth back in April 2007!
Pepe Escobar
BRAVO!
Thank you for this incisive piece and for all of your exceptional work published by the Asia Times -- your critical analysis of the Middle East and South Asia is second to none -- and your last paragraph absolutely nails it.
Note CD: More Pepe Escobar -- please!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bravo Pepe!! Bravo!
Let's see the bleeding heart American liberals have any appetite for the truth and/or logic. An interventionist regime-change policy is abhorred by the liberals for nearly a decade when the perpetrator was Bush. But the liberals are back on their do-gooder high horse again with Obama.
The western backed junta destroyed Libya under the auspice of ousting the tired cliche of a middle-eastern tyrant. Libya is now a hell hole at the verge of a civil war. Although China had Russia had legitimate economic interests in the Gadahffi Libya, they lacked the backbone to halt a UN sanctioned intervention. It appears they have finally grown a backbone not to allow a similar intervention to take place Syria under similarly false pretenses.
China and Russia didn't veto the UNSC resolution on Libya because they actually believed the humanitarian pretense. Fooled, they've embarked on a method to undermine Dollar Hegemony and its PetroDollar that enables the US Empire's attempt to conquer the planet--a Bipartisan attempt. Obama is no Liberal; he's a reactionary neocon just like Bush. Oh and thanks for revealing your true self here, you "astute student of science."
Apparently you and I agree on this matter (except your assertion that China and Russia 'actually believed the humanitarian pretense' of the Libyan intervention..I think they lacked backbone),but apparently you are so wounded that I questioned your global warming orthodoxy on another thread, you couldn't see it.
You're approaching somewhat of a pathetic state.
The FUK-US NATO Cabal & AL Members- [the Saudis, Qataris, GCC] & those NTC Racist Thugs, have a got a Whole Lotta of GALL to be out-raged that Russia & China blocked their attempts to do a Libya Redux in Syria!!! And Billary has the nerve to lecture Russia & China after she cackled 'I came, I saw, He died- Ha, Ha!' - after Khadaffi was ASS RAPED w a Knife-like object & then slaughtered by that FUK-US NATO backed Racist Lynch-mob [aka the NTC}- 2 days after she came to Libya to personally issue a HIT Order on Khadaffi's head!!!
Last yr this same Cabal said in UN Res 1973 that they wanted a negotiated settlement in Libya & then blocked / rejected all such attempts even as Khadaffi agreed to them. They used that phony R2P No-Fly zone to bombard Libya for 7 months. They said they didn't want regime-change but tried multiple times to kill Kadafffi & didn't stop till they finally drew him into their ambush.
And we should NeVeR Forget the NeoCON {s}HIT List that ex-NATO Gen Wesley Clark confirmed has been in effect since the end of 2001 - including: IRAQ, LIBYA, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, IRAN & SYRIA!!!
CD only publishes some of Pepe Escobar's stories. If you want to read them all, go to the source. Atimes.com. And can you imagine outside Thugs and Mercenaries hanging out in Syria. Who would of ever thought so, wonder where they come from?
You have changed my perception of Qatar for the worse.