US strategy in Syria is not to allow Islamists to come to power, but to use them to force a political settlement – one in which Assad steps down and relinquishes power to actors who are keen to turn Syria into a western puppet state.
Pretty much sums it all up right there. Why do we keep saying Assad must go? Because as long as he is in power, we cannot put in our US puppet state.
Why is NATO supporting crazed Islamists like ISIS and Al Qaeda?
They are simply a convenient tool to use to get rid of Assad. We don’t really want them to take power. We think we can use them to get rid of Assad and then abandon them once we put our puppet regime in.
Even if we cannot put our puppets in power, just getting rid of Assad should be enough. Getting rid of Assad without replacing him with anything of similar gravitas would result in a failed state similar to Iraq, Afghanistan and especially Libya. The West would love to turn Syria into another Libya. Gaddafi is gone and with him the powerful anti-Western secular nationalist leader who was a threat to Israel and limiting the profits of oil commits in addition to mounting a serious threat on the dollar’s role as world reserve currency. Now there is effectively no state in Libya, which is better than a powerful anti-Western state. Libya is no threat to US oil and economic interests, nor is it a threat to Israel.
Some of the end goals of removing Assad:
- If a failed state results, a Syrian failed state is no longer a powerful chain in the Iranian influenced Shia crescent of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah.
- One of the last remaining threats to Israel, a powerful Syrian state, is gone. The resulting chaos is of little threat to the Israelis. Israel fears strong state actors, not disparate terrorist groups, and Israel thinks they can deal with Al Qaeda and ISIS. At any rate, Israel would much prefer even ISIS or Al Qaeda in power in Syria than Assad.
- A US puppet may even make a sort of cold peace with Israel similar to what almost the entire Sunni Arab Wold has done. The only real opposition to Israel in the world now at state level is Syria, Iran and the pseudo-state called Hezbollah. When it comes to Israel, almost all of the remaining Sunnis states are now US allies and have made a sort of cold peace with Israel.
- The gas pipeline from Qatar to Turkey to Europe can now go forward, although actually this is much more likely under the puppet state scenario. Qatar and the West want this pipeline very badly because of the wealth it will bring to Qatar and Western interests and because it will offer Europeans an alternative to Europe’s dependence on Russia for gas supplies, a dependence that is very annoying to the West. Furthermore, Russia will lose a lot of business with the completion of the Qatar-Turkish pipeline. The pipeline is already in the works, but Assad said no to running the pipeline through his country. Some people think this is the major reason for the war right there. Keep in mind that most wars are ultimately about economics under capitalism and especially capitalism-imperialism.
- Hezbollah would be set adrift and lose its major funder and supplier. As it is, Iran runs weapons and funds to Hezbollah via its ally Syria. Syria is the middle link in the Iran-Hezbollah supply chain. A major enemy of Israel and the West is left without supplies or weapons.
- The Shia crescent of Iran – Iraq – Syria – Hezbollah now has a huge gaping hole in it.
- Removal of Assad is a huge blow to Iran because the resulting government, either Islamist or US puppets, will be Sunnis who dislike both Iran and Hezbollah. Iran would lose a huge ally and and a major source of influence in the Arab World.
- Turkey removers a major thorn in its side. Turkey would like a puppet Sunni Islamist state in Syria ultimately.
- A US puppet would crack down on the Kurds in eastern Syria.
- A US puppet would open up Syria’s oil, gas and other resources to Western exploitation
0 thoughts on “US Endgame in Syria”
I am not sure about this article. It assumes America is rational, but we know America acts irrationally all the time. In fact it is more true to say that America has no idea about what is in its best interests. The article assumes that America knows what it is doing in the Middle East!
Essentially the article is aconspiracy theory. America is in fact clueless and even the well fed fat cat Saudis joke openly nowadays that they have no idea what Obama is putting in his tea. Things just go from bad to worse with his overseas strategy;and so the most tenable solution to the puzzle of the logic Of American actions is to assert that his administration Is inept. This is a whole lot more rational than pie in the sky conspiracy theories of of how one of the main actors in this war is demonstrating fiendish deviousness.
The article fails to demonstrate the veracity of its assumptions. These assumptions are tacitly accepted, but they will not hold up on close examination.