After
over a year of flip-flopping and
reversing its position on Syria
and its president, Bashar al-Assad, the U.S has finally admitted the real
reason its military continues to violate Syria’s sovereignty. From the Washington Post:
“After months of incoherence, the Trump administration has taken a
step toward a clear policy on Syria and its civil war. In a speech last week,
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson bluntly
recognized a truth that both President Trump
and President Barack Obama attempted to dodge: that ‘it is crucial to our national
defense to maintain a military and diplomatic presence in Syria, to
help bring an end to that conflict, and assist the Syrian people . . . to
achieve a new political future.’ To do that, the United States will
continue to deploy several thousand personnel in the country and help allied
Syrian forces maintain control over enclaves in the southwest, near Israel and
Jordan, and the northeast, on the border with Iraq and Turkey.” [emphasis
added]
The great lie told by the Washington Post editorial
board, however, is its attempt to paint Washington’s regime change operation in
Syria as crucial to America’s national defense and a “truth that both President Trump and President Barack Obama
attempted to dodge.” In doing so, the Post is suggesting that regime change in Syria is
the only realistic path for the U.S. to pursue, even when it has become
increasingly clear that the longer the U.S. prolongs the war in Syria, the greater the suffering of ordinary Syrians will
be.
Considering that the U.S. military’s recent strategy in Syria
allegedly involves a 30,000-strong Kurdish and Arab border force that in less
than a week prompted a Turkish invasion,
it should be clear that the U.S. has no intention of putting Syria on the long-awaited
road to peace.
However, according to the Washington Post, the
U.S.’ new proposal is justified.
“Critics predictably charge that Mr. Trump is launching another
‘endless war’ in Syria,” the WaPo Editorial Board writes. “In fact, the administration has simply recognized reality: The
United States cannot prevent a resurgence of al-Qaeda and the Islamic State,
prevent Iran from building bases across Syria, or end a civil war that has sent
millions of refugees toward Europe without maintaining control over forces
inside the country, just as Russia and Iran do.”
If you ever needed proof that the corporate media actively
promotes the U.S. war machine, this is it. None of the above is true. At best,
it is purposely disingenuous.
It is widely accepted that it
was the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 that not only paved the way for
al-Qaeda to take root in Iraq but also laid the foundation for
what would later become ISIS (ISIS evolved out of what was previously referred to as al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).
ISIS was then able to grow from strength to strength in Syria,
primarily by taking advantage of U.S. weapons transfers. Further,
U.S.-led foreign policy actively weakened the Syrian state since
2011, creating a vacuum for these terrorists to take root.
The Washington Post’s attempt
to absolve American foreign policy of its role in the refugee crisis ignores
the fact that after the Syrian government was able to retake Syria’s major
cities, hundreds of thousands of refugees
began returning to their homes.
The references to Iran also raise some issues. If Syria opts to
allow Iran to build bases inside its country, international law dictates that
no other country should be allowed to interfere with this proposal. The U.S. is
suspected of having close to 1,000 bases worldwide, and many of
them have encircled Iran. If the U.S. can have bases, so can any other country.
Further, it is not clear under which legal principle the Washington Post is suggesting the U.S. has
the right to invade someone else’s country just to oppose Iran.
Regardless, it is because of America’s incessant and obsessive
approach of trying to contain Iran that we find Iran emerging as a victor in
these conflicts in the first place. If the U.S. hadn’t spent billions of dollars arming radical Sunni jihadists,
Syria wouldn’t have had any underlying reasons to put effect to its mutual defense treaty with
Iran and allow Iran to gain influence inside the country. Now, Iran’s influence
has spread far beyond that of its borders and has made its way to Israel’s doorstep.
If the U.S. wants to counter Iran and al-Qaeda and bring peace
to Syria, logic dictates that the U.S needs to try a brand new strategy
altogether and respect international law for once. Of course, if recent history
is any indicator, this is just as far-fetched an idea as the notion that the
Trump administration will ever bring peace to this war-torn nation.
