Americans are overwhelmingly polarized over ongoing presidential election campaigns. The choice is going to be between Donald Trump – an oligarch accused of disregarding the interests of minorities, and Hillary Clinton – an utterly disgraced public servant too unqualified and incompetent to even serve at the lowest possible grade in the US State Department. But, between the two, one has already clearly […]
Aime la vérité, mais pardonne à l’erreur.
Love truth, but pardon error.
In considering what will be the subject of my September article at my Press TV column, I have quite a selection of subjects to choose from.
The first that comes to mind is the Scottish independence referendum set to take place on 18 September. I do feel quite strongly that Scots should vote in favor of independence, so that might be my choice. On the other hand, I am concerned about developments in some key violent conflict zones: Gaza, Ukraine and Syria/Iraq. I write Syria/Iraq because the boundary between those states is very much in question at the moment as a result of the “caliphate” supposedly occupying a large space overlapping the two.
Syria is the most likely subject I will write on, at this stage. This is because, quite simply, I feel it has been forgotten, and the popular amnesia over this is asinine when that conflict is the crux of the problem in Iraq. The following is a brief overview of the analysis I would like to share, and will probably be expanding on significantly in my article at Press TV.
The so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/ISIS) is the result of reckless policy by certain countries, namely Turkey and the other NATO states that had gambled on safeguarding the areas controlled by “rebels” in Syria. That even extended to deploying PATRIOT missiles to create an actual umbrella of air defenses for the ISIL terrorists centered in the north of Syria. To date, Turkey is still guilty of using this air defense umbrella to protect ISIL terrorists from Bashar al-Assad’s military. Persian Gulf countries Qatar and Saudi Arabia are likely also to blame for the dreadful rise of ISIL, but they actively support the Sunni Islamist movements that ISIL forms a key part of, and so ISIL is not an accidental evil on their part but a deliberate one.
What is most astonishing about this situation is that the “safe havens” of terror in northern “liberated” parts of Syria and terrorized cities like Raqqa were created by no accident. They are the exact same “safe havens” that the US government was earlier lobbied into creating for the so-called “rebels” in Syria. Allow me to repeat: the den of terror based in Syria, which was previously called the “liberated area” of the Syrian rebels, is the same territory carved out by the US-backed Syrian rebels.
Any talk by the US and UK of now siding with al-Assad’s regime against the so-called Islamic State will not remedy the fact that they created this problem in the first place. Their desperate attempt to realign with al-Assad is just a weak act of admission that their own earlier self-righteous, arrogant and myopic policy supporting fake “rebels” was a failure. It is not surprising that the suggestion of working with Assad has been thrown out of the discussion as quickly as it appeared. No topic could be more embarrassing for the inept British and American governments who deceived no one other than themselves into supporting fake rebels, and thereby empowered the real beneficiary of the Syrian Civil War – the terrorist so-called Islamic State.
I might write a longer and more nuanced version of the above analysis for Press TV in September, which you’ll be able to find at my column probably on 1st-3rd September.