Contrary to the picture
portrayed by Atlanticist propaganda, Thierry Meyssan takes a long-term view of
international relations. For him, what we have seen in Syria over the last
seven years is not a civil war, but rather a seventeen-year regional war in the
greater Middle East. This vast conflict, from which Russia emerges victor over
NATO, is gradually giving rise to a new world equilibrium.
All
wars end with winners and losers. The seventeen years we have just lived
through in the “Greater Middle East” is no exception. Yet, while Saddam Hussein
and Muammar Gaddafi have been eliminated and Syria is winning, the only real
losers are the Arab people.
At
the most, one can pretend to believe that the problem concerns only Syria. And
that in Syria, it is circumscribed to Ghouta. And that in Ghouta, the Army of
Islam has been defeated. Yet, this episode will not be enough to declare the
end of the hostilities that have ravaged the region, destroyed entire cities
and killed hundreds of thousands of men, women and children.
Nevertheless, the surviving
myth that “civil wars” spread by contagion [1] allows the 130 states and international
organizations that participated in the “Friends of Syria” meetings to shirk
their responsibilities and to hold their heads high. Furthermore, since they
will never admit failure, they will continue to perpetrate their abuses in
other theaters of operation. In other words: their war will soon be over in
this region, but it will resume elsewhere.
From this point of view, what
has played out in Syria since the US declaration of war nearly 15 years ago –
i.e. when the Syrian Accountability Act was
passed into law in December 2003 – will have shaped the world Order that is
currently emerging. Indeed, while almost all the states in the “Greater Middle
East” have been weakened or completely wrecked, Syria is the only one still
standing and independent.
Consequently,
the strategy of Admiral Cebrowski, designed to destroy the societies and states
of non-globalized countries while compelling the globalized ones to ensure the
security of the US military, allowing it to plunder the raw materials and
energy sources in the destroyed areas, can not be implemented by the Pentagon
either here or in any other region. Ajouter footnote de ton article!
Under
President Trump’s leadership, the US Armed Forces have gradually ceased to
support the jihadists and have begun to withdraw from the battlefield. This
does not mean they have become philanthropic overnight, but simply realistic.
This development should mark the end of their interventions against foreign
states.
In the spirit of the 1941
Atlantic Charter in which London and Washington agreed to jointly control the
oceans and world trade, the United States is now preparing to sabotage the
trade of its Chinese rival. Donald Trump is reforming the Quad(together with co-members Australia, Japan and
India) to limit the movements of the Chinese merchant fleet in the Pacific.
Simultaneously, he named John Bolton as National Security Advisor, whose great
achievement under the Bush Jr. Administration was to involve NATO Allies in the
military surveillance of the oceans and global trade.
China’s
grand “silk road” project on both land and sea is not likely to materialize for
some time. Now that Beijing has decided to move its goods through Turkey
instead of Syria and through Belarus instead of Ukraine, we should expect
“disorders” to erupt in these two countries.
Already
in the fifteenth century, China had tried to reopen the Silk Road by building a
huge fleet of 30,000 men under the command of the Muslim admiral Zheng He.
Despite the warm welcome received by this peaceful armada in the Persian Gulf,
Africa and the Red Sea, the undertaking failed. The emperor had the whole fleet
burned and China withdrew into itself for five centuries.
President
Xi drew inspiration from this illustrious predecessor to envisage “the Road and
Belt Initiative” but, like Emperor Ming Xuanzong, he could be led to scuttle
his own initiative, notwithstanding the risk of losing the huge amounts already
invested by his country.
For
its part, the United Kingdom has not renounced its plan to instigate a new
“Arab revolt”, a scheme which in 1915 served to bring the Wahhabis to power,
from Libya to Saudi Arabia. However, the so-called “Arab Spring” of 2011, which
this time was meant to install the Muslim Brotherhood in power, was snuffed out
by the Syrian-Lebanese resistance.
London
intends to exploit the US “pivot to Asia” strategy to recover the influence it
wielded during its former empire. The UK is poised to leave the European Union
and has directed its armed forces against Russia. It has tried to secure the
largest possible number of allies by manipulating the “Skripal case”, but has
suffered several setbacks, including New Zealand’s refusal to continue playing
the docile “dutiful Dominion”. Logically, London should redirect its jihadists
against Moscow as it did during the wars unleashed in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia
and Chechnya.
Russia
is the only great power to have emerged victorious from the Middle East
conflict, thereby achieving the goal set by Catherine the Great to gain access
to the Mediterranean and save the cradle of Christianity, the bedrock of
Russian culture.
Moscow
is now expected to enlarge the Eurasian Economic Union, to which Syria applied
to join in 2015. At that time, its membership had been suspended at the request
of Armenia, reluctant to introduce a state at war into the common economic
space, but now the order of things has changed.
The
new world balance has been bipolar from the moment Russia unveiled its new
nuclear arsenal. It is very likely that the world will be divided in two, not
by an iron curtain, but by the will of the Western powers who are already in
the process of separating the banking systems and will soon try to do the same
with the Internet. On the one side, it should be based on NATO and, on the
other, no longer on the Warsaw Pact but on the Collective Security Treaty
Organization. In a period of about thirty years, Russia has turned the page of
Bolshevism and has shifted its influence from the center of Europe towards the
Middle East.
In a
pendulum movement, the West – the former “free world” – has morphed into a set
of coercive and falsely consensual societies. The European Union is endowed
with a bigger and more oppressive bureaucracy than that of the Soviet Union.
And Russia becomes once again the champion of International Law.
—
[1] “Aggression
disguised as civil wars”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete
Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 27 February 2018.
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.
The
articles on Voltaire Network may be freely reproduced provided the source is
cited, their integrity is respected and they are not used for commercial
purposes (license CC BY-NC-ND).
Previous
article by Thierry Meyssan: The Real British Foreign Policy