US Middle East Wars Far from Over

Iraq continues to find itself in the middle of Washington's ongoing struggle to reassert itself in the region. Can the new Iraqi PM free himself of his checkered pro-Western past? Or will he allow the US a foothold to further draw out Iraq's (and the region's) unending turmoil? 

June 26, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Despite what appears to be a terminal decline of US influence over the Middle East, Washington has no intentions of gracefully abandoning its aspirations of regional hegemony.

Air strikes carried out against Syria by Washington's Israeli proxies, a mysterious explosion near Tehran, and the current Iraqi Prime Minister's decision to round up leaders of Iranian-backed militias who helped defeat the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) unfolded in quick succession in an apparent coordinated campaign aimed at Iran and its allies.

The Washington DC-based Al Monitor in an article titled, "Suspected Israeli airstrikes hit various locations in Syria," would claim:

Suspected Israeli airstrikes hit Syrian military and Iran-backed militia sites Tuesday night and early Wednesday morning. There are differing reports on the casualties.

This morning’s aerial assault targeted Syrian military sites outside the central city of Hama.

Days later, under orders by Iraq's new prime minister - Mustafa Al-Kadhimi - Iraqi security forces raided the headquarters of an Iranian-backed militia detaining several leaders.

Reuters in its article, "Iraqi forces raid Iran-backed militia base, detain commanders: government sources," would claim:

Iraqi security forces raided a headquarters belonging to a powerful Iran-backed militia in southern Baghdad late on Thursday, seized rockets and detained three commanders of the group, two Iraqi government officials said.

The officials said the militia group targeted was the Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah, which U.S. officials have accused of firing rockets at bases hosting U.S. troops and other facilities in Iraq.

Iraq has been under significant pressure from the US to roll back growing ties with Iran and still hosts thousands of US troops illegally occupying its territory as well as a myriad of militant groups the US and its regional allies back either openly or covertly including Al Qaeda and ISIS itself.

More recently, a massive explosion took place just southeast of Iran's capital, Tehran. While Iranian officials claim it was an accident at a civilian gas storage facility, pro-war elements across the West have insisted it was the result of an attack on a military complex located in the region.

Should it turn out to be an attack - US proxies - either Israel or US-backed terrorists operating inside Iran are most likely responsible representing a strategy laid out by US policymakers as early as 2009 in their own papers - particularly and explicitly in the Brookings Institution's 2009 paper, "Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran" (PDF) under chapters including, "Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike," and "Inspiring an Insurgency: Supporting Iranian Minority And Opposition Groups."

The timing of the explosion, following two highly provocative moves made against Iran and its allies in the region suggest the US is attempting to escalate tensions with Iran to save its fading influence in the Middle East.

New Iraqi Prime Minister's Checkered Past 

Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi took office in May 2020.

While he has warned about deepening relations with Iran he has concurrently stated the importance of US backing - despite the US having illegally invaded, destroyed, and since occupied Iraq starting in 2003. 

His past - including his exile in London and his US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) linked Iraq Memory Foundation as well as his regular contributions to the above mentioned Washington DC-based Al Monitor call into serious question his ability to protect Iraq's sovereignty as well as Iraq's best interests.

On the Iraq Memory Foundation's own website under "About," it admits its genesis as a spin-off of a US NED funded Harvard-based front called the Iraq Research and Documentation Project (IRDP). The website claims (emphasis added):

The Memory Foundation is an outgrowth of the Iraq Research and Documentation Project (IRDP), founded by Kanan Makiya at the Center of Middle East Studies at Harvard University in 1992. In 1993, the IRDP developed a plan to create an archive that would organize and preserve the documents already in its possession for more long-term scholarly purposes. Utilizing a 1993 grant from the Bradley Foundation, followed by a 1994 bridging grant from the National Endowment for Democracy, the IRDP began its work processing the small collection of documents in Makiya’s personal possession and transcribing interviews conducted with Iraqi refugees. The IRDP continued to receive and process small datasets over the next ten years.

Regarding Al-Kadhimi himself, the website notes that he previously worked as:

the director of programming for Radio Free Europe’s Iraq service from 1999 to 2003. He also participated in launching the Iraqi Media Network as the Director of Planning and Programming immediately after the fall of Saddam Hussein regime in 2003. Since leaving Al-Iraqiya he has worked with the Iraq Memory Foundation, researching, directing and producing numerous filmed oral history testimonies with survivors of the Saddam Hussein regime.

Radio Free Europe - according to its own website - "is funded by a grant from the U.S. Congress through the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM)."

In an age where simply holding views similar to that of nations like Russia earn among the Western media labels like "Russian agent," Iraq's current prime minister was literally on the payroll of the US government. The website also notes that he produced documentaries for British state programming including the BBC.

All of Al-Kadhimi's efforts fed directly into US war propaganda used to justify Washington's military aggression against Iraq for decades.

Al-Kadhimi also was a regular contributor to Al Monitor - which despite attempting to appear as a Middle Eastern news source - is actually based in Washington DC and headed by American corporate-funded think tank staff and lobbyists.

Al Monitor's president and chief content officer - Andrew Parasiliti - for example has an extensive background in US corporate-funded foundations and lobbying groups which regular receive money from big-oil, defense contractors, and other multi-billion dollar multinational interests to engineer and promote wars and interventions abroad.

Why is the US Still Sanctioning Syria?

June 19, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Chinese media highlighted a recent plea by Beijing to the US to lift sanctions against Syria.

China's CGTN in an article titled, "Chinese envoy asks U.S. to lift unilateral sanctions on Syria," would report:

A Chinese envoy on Tuesday asked the United States to immediately lift unilateral sanctions against Syria.

Years of economic blockade have caused tremendous hardships to the Syrian people, in particular women and children. The sufferings caused by the devaluation of the Syrian currency and soaring commodities prices, including food prices, fall heavily on civilians across the country, said Zhang Jun, China's permanent representative to the United Nations.

China's attempts to aid Syria economically and challenge American sanctions aimed at Damascus follows Russia's open opposition to the US-led proxy war against the Syrian government which included Moscow's direct military involvement in the conflict and Russia's leading role in liquidating US-armed militant groups across the country.

US sanctions against Syria have long since outlived the alleged motivation for America's involvement in the conflict - claims of supporting the democratic aspirations of the Syrian people and opposing alleged human rights violations by the Syrian government.

It has been indisputably revealed that the US deliberately engineered the conflict - from organizing protests before 2011 to arming and deploying militants to the country to shift 2011 street protests into a destructive proxy war. It has also long been revealed that so-called "freedom fighters" were in fact extremists drawn from various terrorist organizations including Al Qaeda and its many franchises.

Since Syria's security operations were in response to what is now revealed to have been US aggression-by-proxy and eventually direct US military aggression against the Syrian government - the sanctions themselves are revealed to be merely an economic component to US attempts to decimate the Syrian nation - not in any way aid or assist the Syrian people.

Oil Profits for Protection: US Extorts Saudi Arabia

April 18, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Legislation circulating in the US Congress threatens to withdraw military support from Saudi Arabia.

This is not because Saudi Arabia is an absolute dictatorship which still severs heads off in public. It is not because Saudi Arabia arms and funds some of the worst terrorist organizations on Earth - including Al Qaeda, its Syrian franchise Tahrir al-Sham - previously known as Jabhat Al Nusra, and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

And it's not even because of Saudi Arabia's years of committing war crimes in neighboring Yemen.

These are all aspects of modern Saudi Arabia the US has in fact aided and abetted.

Instead, US representatives are threatening to withdraw US military support from Saudi Arabia for allegedly lowering energy prices by flooding markets with Saudi oil. 

Reuters in its article, "Bill would remove U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia in 30 days," would claim:

A Republican U.S. senator introduced legislation on Thursday to remove American troops from Saudi Arabia, adding pressure on the kingdom to tighten its oil taps to reverse the crude price drop that has hurt domestic energy companies.

The threat of yanking out military support from Saudi Arabia undermines decades of propaganda attempting to justify US military support for the Saudi regime.

According to the US State Department's own website under a section titled, "U.S. Relations With Saudi Arabia," the US supports Saudi Arabia because (emphasis added):

The United States and Saudi Arabia have a common interest in preserving the stability, security, and prosperity of the Gulf region and consult closely on a wide range of regional and global issues.  Saudi Arabia plays an important role in working toward a peaceful and prosperous future for the region and is a strong partner in security and counterterrorism efforts and in military, diplomatic, and financial cooperation.  Its forces works closely with U.S. military and law enforcement bodies to safeguard both countries’ national security interests.

If anything the US State Department says about US-Saudi relations is true - "preserving the stability, security, and prosperity of the Gulf region" must surely come first and foremost - especially ahead of something as trivial as oil profits for America's domestic shale industry.

Of course, very little the US State Department says is ever true. US ties with Saudi Arabia have helped drive precisely the opposite of stability, security, and prosperity for both the Persian Gulf region as well as the wider Middle East and even as far as North Africa and Central Asia - with both nations playing leading roles in destabilizing and destroying nations, fueling extremism, separatism, and terrorism, and even engaging in direct military aggression.

Because of the dubious nature of US-Saudi ties and the true agenda of money and power that defines them - there should be little surprise that at moments of opportunity, these two "allies" draw geopolitical and economic daggers against one another.

US Media Defends Al Qaeda in Syria

March 26, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - When is a terrorist group not a terrorist group? Apparently when US foreign policy requires it not to be. This is precisely the case regarding Al Qaeda's Syrian branch - Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) - the most recent rebrand of Jabhat Al Nusra - which currently occupies the northern Syrian governorate of Idlib. 

The US corporate media has recently attempted to generate public sympathy for HTS - as well as animosity toward Syrian, Russian, and Iranian forces seeking to liberate the supposedly one million people trapped under the terrorist organization's rule. 

Another factor behind US media support for HTS is the necessity to explain why NATO member Turkey is providing direct military and material support for a US-designated terrorist organization, and why the US itself is in turn providing Turkey support to do so. 

Articles have appeared in Newsweek - for example - framing Russian opposition to negotiations with HTS as negative - and echoing US State Department efforts to support the terrorist organization despite it appearing on Washington's official Foreign Terrorist Organization designation list. 

The article titled, "Russia Warns Against Any U.S. Talks with Militant Group It's Bombing in Syria," is actually referring to Al Qaeda's HTS front when it refers to the "militant group" Russia is bombing in Syria. 

Newsweek places Russian statements regarding the US designation of HTS as a terrorist organization in quotes as if to question the veracity of the claim. 

However, a visit to the US State Department's own website reveals a 2018 statement titled, "Amendments to the Terrorist Designations of al-Nusrah Front," which openly admits:

The Department of State has amended the designation of al-Nusrah Front – an al-Qa’ida affiliate in Syria – to include Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and other aliases. These aliases have been added to al-Nusrah Front’s designations as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Executive Order 13224.

In January 2017, al-Nusrah Front launched the creation of HTS as a vehicle to advance its position in the Syrian uprising and to further its own goals as an al-Qa’ida affiliate. Since January 2017, the group has continued to operate through HTS in pursuit of these objectives.

Thus - according to all sides of the Syrian conflict including Washington - HTS is without doubt - unequivocally a terrorist organization.  

And eventually - 5 paragraphs in - Newsweek also admits HTS is a US-designated terrorist organization - and even includes quotes from US military leaders admitting that Idlib is overrun by extremists. Yet the US-based publication still attempts to frame Syrian and Russian efforts to liberate Idlib from these extremists negatively.   

Newsweek is just one example of the US corporate media obliquely defending terrorism. The New York Times would provide a much more robust defense.  

US Kills Iraqis For Demanding End of Illegal Occupation

March 14, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The US has recently carried out deadly attacks across Iraq - targeting Iraqi state-sponsored militias including Kata'ib Hezbollah who were responsible for the defeat of the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

CNN in its article, "US conducts airstrikes against multiple Iranian-backed militia sites in Iraq," would report:

The US carried out airstrikes on Thursday against multiple Iranian-backed militia sites in Iraq, according to the US Defense Department.

The strikes come one day after the US assessed an Iranian-backed group was responsible for a rocket attack on a base where coalition forces are located, killing two American service members and one British service member.

CNN and other Western corporate media outlets have attempted to depict militias like Kata'ib Hezbollah as "Iranian-backed" in an effort to demonize them - and while they are indeed partly backed by Iran - they are also an official component of the Iraqi military.

The US Bombed Anti-ISIS Forces for Enforcing Iraqi Demands For US Withdrawal

Newsweek itself in a 2018 article titled, "U.S. Soldiers Under Threat as Iran Allies Join Iraq Military with Plans to Kick Americans Out," admitted:

An Iran-backed collective of mostly Shiite Muslim militias was officially made part of the Iraqi military Thursday, a development that placed U.S. forces in a difficult position as Washington tried to pull Baghdad away from its close ties to Tehran.

The article would also note:

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi issued "regulations to adapt the situation of the Popular Mobilization fighters" on Thursday, giving them ranks and salaries equivalent to other branches of the Iraqi military.

Newsweek attempts to depict the development as sinister and the result of Iranian machinations.

Nowhere mentioned by Newsweek is the fact that America's presence in Iraq in the first place was the result of a deliberate lie to justify an illegal and deadly war as well as the subsequent now nearly 20 year US military occupation of Iraq.

While Newsweek attempts to claim it is Iran's goal to oust US troops from Iraq - US troops that have no business or legal ground to be there in the first place - it was the Iraqi parliament itself which recently voted to expel US troops from Iraqi territory - not Tehran.

Germany's DW would publish an article titled, "Iraqi parliament votes to expel US troops — awaits government approval,"  which reported:

Parliament has voted to ask the government to end an agreement to host US troops in Iraq. The move would oust all foreign soldiers, including those from Germany.

DW - in a follow up article titled, "US rejects Iraqi parliament's call to withdraw troops," would report:

Washington and Baghdad should not discuss troop withdrawal, the US State Department has said, refusing parliament's request for US soldiers to leave. 

While Washington claims its military invasion and occupation of Iraq was predicated on fighting terrorism and promoting democracy - it now finds itself openly bombing militias who played a key role in defeating terrorists like ISIS and flagrantly dismissing Iraq's democratically elected parliament and their demands that US troops leave their territory.

Iraq's Right to Defend Itself Against Illegal Invaders 

Of course - were foreign troops in the US and refused US demands to leave - the next logical step would be for the US to expel these foreign troops by force.

This is precisely what is being done to US forces illegally occupying Iraqi territory and refusing to leave.

Their bases are under attack for their refusal to heed Iraqi demands to leave. In response to the attacks - the US claims it must defend its illegal and unwanted occupation through direct military intervention against militias officially augmenting Iraq's armed forces.

US-Israel Predictably Behind Turkish Aggression in Syria

March 11, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Turkey's ongoing fighting in northern Syria's Idlib governorate was - from the beginning of recent escalations - clearly a continuation of Washington's wider now 9 year-long proxy war against Damascus.

Whatever gains Turkey had made in terms of reducing its role in Washington's proxy war and repairing ties with Syria's allies Russia and Iran - were clearly less important to Ankara amid these recent weeks of renewed aggression than whatever Washington has either promised Anakara or threatened it with.

And precisely because Turkey's aggression in Idlib is merely one part of the much wider proxy war Washington continues to wage against Damascus - it was predicted that others involved in the proxy war would coordinate with Turkey elsewhere in Syria.

Israeli Airstrikes

In recent weeks Israel has continued carrying out attacks in Syrian territory.

Recent news has covered Israeli attacks on military targets in Homs - right at the edge of where Turkey's aggression trails off.

Chinese news site Xinhua in its March 5, 2020 article, "Syrian air defenses intercept Israeli missiles in central, southern regions," would report:

Syrian air defenses intercepted Israeli missiles in the central province of Homs and the southern Quneitra province after midnight Thursday, state news agency SANA reported.

The missiles were fired from Israeli warplanes over the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and from Lebanese airspace, said the report, without providing details on the targets.

The attack is the latest in a string of missile strikes carried out by Israel.

Despite Israel and Turkey often posing as being at odds with one another over political, religious, or ideological issues - both nations have coordinated violence against Syria since 2011 as per US designs aimed at overthrowing the Syrian government - described in detail within US policy papers.

US Designs to Use Turkey and Israel as Proxies Revealed as Early as 1983

Ignoring the West's ongoing propaganda surrounding the Syrian conflict and simply looking at US policy papers over the years - it is clear that not only has Washington sought to overthrow the Syrian government for decades - it has sought to do so using the same tricks. 

A 1983 document - part of a deluge of declassified papers released to the public - signed by former CIA officer Graham Fuller titled, "Bringing Real Muscle to Bear Against Syria" (PDF), states (their emphasis):

Syria at present has a hammerlock on US interests both in Lebanon and in the Gulf -- through closure of Iraq's pipeline thereby threatening Iraqi internationalization of the [Iran-Iraq] war. The US should consider sharply escalating the pressures against Assad [Sr.] through covertly orchestrating simultaneous military threats against Syria from three border states hostile to Syria: Iraq, Israel and Turkey. 

The report also states:

If Israel were to increase tensions against Syria simultaneously with an Iraqi initiative, the pressures on Assad would escalate rapidly. A Turkish move would psychologically press him further. 

In 2012 - illustrating how these plans were never taken off the table and merely updated amid the more recent 2011 US proxy war against Syria - the US corporate-funded policy think tank - the Brookings Institution - would publish a paper titled, ""Saving Syria: Assessing Options for Regime Change" (PDF), stating explicitly:

Some voices in Washington and Jerusalem are exploring whether Israel could contribute to coercing Syrian elites to remove Asad. 

The report continues by explaining (emphasis added):

Israel could posture forces on or near the Golan Heights and, in so doing, might divert regime forces from suppressing the opposition. This posture may conjure fears in the Asad regime of a multi-front war, particularly if Turkey is willing to do the same on its border and if the Syrian opposition is being fed a steady diet of arms and training. Such a mobilization could perhaps persuade Syria’s military leadership to oust Asad in order to preserve itself. 

This attempt to create a "multi-front war" amid the current Syrian conflict is a process that continues openly to this very day with news of Turkey and Israel engaged in now direct military aggression against the Syrian government aimed at dividing Syrian forces and reversing Syrian gains on the battlefield.

Trouble had also briefly erupted along the Syrian-Jordanian border where for years the US had - just as it did along the Syrian-Turkish border - funded, armed, trained, and equipped terrorists before sending them into Syria to fight.

The US Lurks Behind the Scenes 

Despite attempt by Washington to portray itself as withdrawing from multiple theaters of military aggression, occupation, and confrontation around the globe there is little actual evidence it is doing so. Instead it appears to merely be attempting to hide its hand by deferring increasingly to proxies.

1983 CIA Document Reveals Plan To Destroy Syria, Foreshadows Current Crisis

March 3, 2020 (Brandon Turbeville) - As the Syrian crisis enters its ninth year, the Donald Trump administration is looking more and more like the Obama administration every day. With the Trump regime refusing to open useful dialogue with Russia regarding Syria, it’s obvious anti-Iran and pro-Israel positioning, and support for a very questionable “safe zone” plan for Syria, the odds of a rational U.S. policy in regards to Syria has lower and lower odds of existence as time progresses. 

Yet, despite the fact that the Trump administration is apparently poised to continue the Obama regime’s proxy war of aggression against the people of Syria, an example of seamless transition, it should also be remembered that the plan to destroy Syria did not begin with Obama but with the Bush administration.

Even now, as the world awaits the continuation of the Syrian war through a Democratic and Republican administration, the genesis of that war goes back to the Republican Bush administration demonstrating that there is indeed an overarching agenda and an overarching infrastructure of an oligarchical deep state intent on moving forward regardless of which party is seemingly in power.

As journalist Seymour Hersh wrote in his article, “The Redirection,”

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

“Extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam” who are “hostile to America and sympathetic to al-Qaeda” are the definition of the so-called “rebels” turned loose on Syria in 2011. Likewise, the fact that both Iran and Hezbollah, who are natural enemies of al-Qaeda and such radical Sunni groups, are involved in the battle against ISIS and other related terrorist organizations in Syria proves the accuracy of the article on another level.

Turkey in Syria: Down a Blind Alley in an Unwinnable War?

March 2, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Fighting in northern Syria has escalated as Syrian forces retake the last remaining bastions of foreign-funded militants and encircle, cut-off, and in some cases catch in the crossfire their Turkish backers.

Turkey had been making some promising steps in the right direction since Washington's disastrous proxy regime-change war in Syria began unraveling - yet it still maintains a problematic position inside Syrian territory, backing what are unequivocally terrorists and obstructing Syria's sovereign right to recover and restore order within its own borders.

The latest and most dangerous manifestation of this untenable policy is the increasingly frequent and fierce clashes between Turkish forces occupying Syrian territory and Syrian forces themselves moving deeper into the northern Syrian governorate of Idlib.

The BBC in its article, "Syria war: Turkey will not let Syrian army advance in Idlib, says Erdogan," would summarize the Turkish position amid recent hostilities, reporting:

Turkey will not let Syria's government gain more ground in the opposition stronghold of Idlib province, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says.

Mr Erdogan told reporters that Russian-backed pro-government forces were "driving innocent and grieving people in Idlib towards our borders".

More than half a million civilians have fled their homes since the government launched an offensive in December.

Mr Erdogan's warning came after eight Turkish military personnel were killed.

Indeed - hostilities in Idlib will undoubtedly drive fleeing militants and their families toward the Syrian-Turkish border and inevitably compound Turkey's already large refugee problem. Yet this is not Syria's doing, nor that of Syria's Russian and Iranian allies. It is the doing of malign US foreign policy that Turkey had initially played a key role in facilitating - and at times still appears to be eagerly abetting.

The refugee crisis in Turkey itself was cynically used several times in the past by Ankara and its Western allies at the time for political leverage in demonizing Damascus and to justify more direct Western intervention against Syria.

But pursuing genuine peace was and still is the obvious solution to the refugee crisis - a solution Turkey has so far refused to fully commit to. Along with Turkey's most recent attempt to cite the refugee crisis to justify its military presence in Syria is the Western media which is attempting to reuse years of propaganda to vilify Damascus and its allies, hoping to hinder security operations and drag out hostilities further.

Ironically and unfortunately - such attempts to hide behind humanitarian concern, protracting hostilities - will lead only to more loss of life.

Holding up the refugee crisis as an excuse to continue occupying Syrian territory and expand what is now becoming direct Turkish hostilities against Syrian forces will do little to justify Turkey's current policy regarding Syria. It will also do little to improve the prospects of what are essentially unachievable objectives for the Turkish government and military - including maintaining its occupation of Syrian territory and its backing of militants operating there.

Turkish Forces Will Leave Syria - One Way or Another 

Turkish troops will not be able to remain indefinitely in Syria. Their proxies will eventually be liquidated and the positions of Turkish forces surrounded by Syrian forces. In many areas of Idlib this is already the case. Additional Turkish troops and supplies fed into losing battles and what is ultimately a lost war will only delay the inevitable undoing of Turkish interests in Syria.

Flashpoints in Southern Syria Seek to Divide/Distract Syrian Gains in Idlib

March 2, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - Turkey and Israel continue their aggression against Syria in an increasingly overt and direct manner - and at the cost of what little if anything remained of either nation's regional or international credibility.

Now there is news of violence erupting in southern Syria in Daraa along the Syrian-Jordanian border in a replay of the initial US-engineered proxy war initiated against Damascus in 2011 and confirms that the US - the common denominator linking Turkish, Israeli, and Jordanian aggression - is still hard at work attempting to perpetuate the Syrian conflict and reverse its flagging fortunes amid it.

Dividing Syrian Forces

The violence in southern Syria will likely be augmented by flashpoints elsewhere in a bid to divide and distract Syrian forces from their ongoing operations and successes in northern Idlib.

This helps expose that the ongoing confrontation between Turkey and Syria isn't ultimately being engineered in Ankara or on behalf of Turkish interests - but instead in Washington and on behalf of US interests.

This may explain why Turkey's otherwise dead-end foreign policy has not been altered to reflect the interests of Turkey both immediately or in the intermediate to long-term future - and instead appears to be a last-ditch and desperate attempt to win Washington's all-but-lost proxy war against Damascus.

Renewed Propaganda Blitzkrieg 

The violence in Syria's south is independent of Turkey's operations in the north - but is clearly being coordinated to aid Turkey's aggression.

Likewise - a renewed propaganda blitz has been organized across the Western media to help enhance the political impact of continued aggression against Damascus.

There are still columns published across the Western media by writers representing organizations funded by Western governments calling for regime change in Syria and the obstruction of reconstruction until this happens.

There are also attempts to use the West's protraction of this conflict and the resulting humanitarian impact to further demonize and pressure the Syrian government. Turkey - in addition to its continued aggression within Syrian territory - has once again leveraged refugees - releasing them into Europe to fan the flames of public fear in the West.

This is not to gain Western support for Turkey's military operations in Syria - as Turkey's operations are carried out on behalf of the West's own machinations. Instead - another manufactured and exploited refugee crisis is meant to garner public support from the Western public so that Western governments can more aggressively involve themselves alongside their Turkish, Israeli, and other terrorist proxies.

Futility 

Ultimately this is a replay of all the same tricks used since 2011. The difference now is US and its proxies hold less territory in Syria - fewer cards politically upon the global stage - and face an entrenched Russia and Iran who have grown adept at countering US-fuelled violence and political ploys within and beyond Syria.

This recent renewal of aggression against Syria is more likely a last-ditch effort to extract concessions before the final and inevitable conclusion of the conflict - with all but total war being capable of overthrowing the Syrian government and removing Russia and Iran from their growing positions of influence within Syrian territory.

Complacency is the biggest enemy. Until every square inch of Syrian territory is liberated and its borders fully secured - the war will continue and the threat it poses to the Syrian state and its people will endure - however unlikely the nation's complete ruination may be. 

Turkey's Losing Bet in Syria

February 28, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Turkey has allegedly lost another 33 troops in Syria this week amid its refusal to withdraw from Syrian territory amid Syrian government gains in the northern governorate of Idlib. 

The BBC in its article, "Syria war: 33 Turkish troops killed in air strike in Idlib," would report:

At least 33 Turkish soldiers have been killed in an air strike by Syrian "regime forces" in north-western Syria, a senior Turkish official has said.

More were hurt in Idlib province, said Rahmi Dogan, the governor of Turkey's Hatay province. Other reports put the death toll higher.

Turkey later retaliated against Syrian troops government targets.

The US-led proxy war against Syria is all but over. It is just a matter of time before Damascus and its allies restore control over the entire nation and begin rebuilding.

The US-armed and funded terrorists that have ravaged the country since 2011 have been exposed, depleted, and cornered. So desperate is the state of this proxy war that in recent years the US and its allies including Turkey and Israel have resorted increasingly to direct military action against Damascus itself as their proxies are no longer capable of carrying out sustained military operations themselves.

And despite brazen aggression against Damascus and its forces - the combined military might of the US, Turkey, and Israel have failed to produce any noteworthy or sustainable gains in contrast to Damascus' imminent victory.

Giving Up a Graceful Exit 

Turkey has been a NATO member since the 1950's and was an eager participant in Washington's proxy war on Syria allowing its territory and resources to be used to flood Syria with terrorists, weapons, equipment, and money to fuel the destructive 9 year conflict.

Despite Turkey's integral role in facilitating Washington's malice and destructive proxy war, Syria's allies - seeing the conflict as ending in Damascus' favor - attempted to create a graceful exit for Turkey and the possibility of playing a more constructive role in the region they - not Washington - would now be shaping.

This included economic and military ties with Russia and Iran to help ease pressure from Washington who was attempting to cut both to punish and increasingly uncompliant Ankara. 

However, recent events appear to indicate that Turkey has rejected this graceful exit. Turkish forces find themselves increasingly escalating directly against Syrian forces and now even their nuclear-armed Russian allies.

Nothing Turkey can do short of total war in northern Syria will reverse their flagging fortunes.

The occupation of northern Syria through the use of depleted proxies is no longer sustainable. The invasion and occupation of northern Syria by Turkish forces capable of repelling Syrian government forces backed by nuclear-armed Russia is also not a viable policy.

Discovering whatever Ankara is still being promised - or threatened with - by Washington to continue its policy of belligerence and disruption in northern Syria will be key to dissuading Turkish cooperation with the US - or formulating a strategy to frustrate and defeat the lingering machinations of Washington and its two chief partners - Turkey and Israel.

Turkey now finds itself in the unenviable position of having all but abandoned promising ties with the winners of the Syrian conflict and a constructive role in reorganizing the region in the conflict's aftermath - and now also doubling down on a clearly lost war that will cost Turkey not only blood and treasure, but also its standing in the region in the near to intermediate future. 

US Middle East "Peace Deal" Designed to Perpetuate Conflict

February 19, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - A deal that is entirely unacceptable to one of its principal parties isn't a deal at all. In the case of the US-proposed "Middle East peace plan" - unsurprisingly endorsed by the US and Israel and few others - everything about it is designed to sabotage peace and perpetuate conflict - perhaps even expand it.

The London Guardian in its article, "Palestinians cut ties with Israel and US after rejecting Trump peace plan," would note what are obvious conditions Palestine could not and should not accept:

The blueprint, endorsed by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, calls for the creation of a demilitarised Palestinian state that would exclude Jewish settlements built in occupied territory and remain under near-total Israeli security control.

Demilitarizing Palestine and subjecting it to occupation blatantly illegal under international law and what would undoubtedly be continued Israeli aggression, provocations, and encroachment is akin to unconditional surrender and subjugation - conditions no government could be expected to accept with Palestine being no exception.

An op-ed published by Al Jazeera titled, Trump's Middle East plan may have a silver lining: Trump's plan will not make the Palestinians' lives better, but it could help dismantle the disastrous Oslo order," would aptly describe the deal as:

Basically, Trump's plan promises the Israelis an almost full realisation of the Zionist objectives to establish a Jewish state on all of historic Palestine, while offering the Palestinians "prosperous apartheid", ie life under occupation with more money but no dignity and basic rights.

Of course, promises of money may or may not be fulfilled. A Palestine rendered defenseless and entirely dependent on ill-willed sponsors has no way to ensure such promises are fulfilled.

Thus the "peace plan" is yet another demonstration of Washington's continued malign presence in the Middle East and its absolute disinterest in changing course. The Guardian would also note that several Arab allies of the US would side with Washington's proposal, prioritizing joint belligerence toward Iran rather than solidarity with Palestine.

Helping ease Arab allies of Washington out of their pretend concern for Palestine will - Washington hopes - help them focus entirely on US plans to create a united front against Iran as US power and influence in the region slips. 

Politics and Power, Not Religion 

This disingenuous and counterproductive "peace plan" does however help illustrate that the current, ongoing conflict in the Middle East is not driven by religion, neither Zionist nor Islamic extremism, but rather by politics and in particular - designs to maintain Western hegemony in the region that has existed since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Religion and its perversion through extremism is simply used to augment and propel these designs.

Were the conflict purely a matter of religion - Sunni and Shia'a soldiers wouldn't be fighting side-by-side in Syria against US-sponsored terrorists. Arab nations would not be abandoning Palestine in favor of joining the US and Israel in their collective belligerence against Iran. And no nation in the region - save for Israel - would accept the most recent "peace plan" proposed by the US.

Seeing through a "peace plan" intentionally designed to further inflame emotions and deepen divides and understanding the true interests driving regional conflict will help establish common ground rather than erode it. The actual people living in Israel have more in common with ordinary people living in Palestine than with the current circle of special interests dominating the Israeli government.

Ordinary people seek peace and stability - to live out their lives and provide for their families. Tensions and the conflicts they lead to only disrupt ordinary people from achieving this basic desire - whether they are Israelis or Palestinians.

The US proposal illustrates to people on either side of the divide that the US is not an honest broker and that the current process posing as pursuing peace should be dismantled.

Because of this, and just as the US has faded from other areas of the world and even from other areas within the Middle East - the US will fade from prominence regarding the Israeli-Palestinian question - hopefully opening the way for more honest brokers to move in and propose a genuine peace deal that will right injustices and provide for the best interests of ordinary people rather than merely pose as doing so while serving the interests of a malign few.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. 

US Policy Vs. Iran: Apex Desperation

February 5, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - US policy versus Iran has reached new heights of desperation and new lows in terms of undermining international law and norms.

In Washington's losing battle to maintain hegemony in the Middle East at the expense of the actual people and nations that exist there - it has resorted to high-level assassinations, unilateral strikes against targets within sovereign nations against the expressed will of the governments presiding over them, all while exposing what appears to be growing American military, political, and economic impotence.

In sharp contrast, nations like Russia and China have made gains as Washington's flagging fortunes create a power vacuum in the region. Rather than replacing the US as regional hegemons themselves - Moscow and Beijing are extending their multipolar concept into the Middle East - assisting nations in rebuilding themselves after years of US-engineered and led conflict, warding off additional conflict the US is attempting to use to reassert itself in the region, and allowing nations to stand on their own and pursue their own interests independently of the traditional spheres of power established during the age of empires.

US Think Tanks Out of Ideas   

Corporate-funded US policy think tank - the Brookings Institution - and one of its senior fellows Daniel Byman - recently published an article titled, "Is deterrence restored with Iran?," in which several good points are made - but many more revealing aspects of America's increasingly sick and out of touch foreign policy are exposed particularly in regards to Iran.

Byman's writings are important to consider since Byman signed his name alongside several other prominent Brookings fellows upon the institution's 2009 paper, "Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran" (PDF), in which the groundwork for everything that unfolded before and since 2009 regarding US policy toward Iran was laid out in great detail.

The 2009 paper included US plans to undermine Iranian political and social stability through targeting its economy and funding opposition groups and protests - which the US subsequently did. It included plans to fund and arm militants to carry out violence aimed at coercing or overthrowing the Iranian government - which the US also did. It also included plans to covertly provoke war with Iran to serve as a pretext for US-led regime change - which the US is clearly and repeatedly attempting to do.

More interesting still is that the paper also included plans to lure Iran into a peace deal specifically for the US to make claims Tehran failed to honor it and to serve as a pretext for war. It is interesting because not only did the subsequent "Iran Nuclear Deal" fulfill the paper's requirements, the machination unfolded over the terms of two US presidents - Barrack Obama and Donald Trump - serving as a reminder that special interests drive US foreign policy, not America's elected leaders, and that the agendas of these special interests transcend US presidential administrations rather than find themselves subjected to them.

Byman's recent article - one might expect - would be full of revisions and fresh ideas regarding US foreign policy in the Middle East and policy regarding Iran - considering the plans laid out in the 2009 paper have dramatically failed.

Instead it is filled with tired narratives including unfounded accusations that Iran seeks nuclear weapons or is funding "terrorism" across the region rather than reacting to real US-sponsored terrorism in the form of Al Qaeda, its affiliates and the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

It is now common knowledge that these terrorist organizations have been openly armed and backed by the US and its allies in their failed bid to overthrow the government of Syria, pressure the government of Iraq, and defeat Houthi fighters in Yemen.

Other tired narratives laid out by Byman include feigning knowledge of Israel's role as a US proxy and that Israeli aggression is used as an intermediary for Washington's regional designs.

If US policymakers are this detached from reality - or at least their explanations to unwitting audiences they are attempting to sell policy to are this detached - the policies they are attempting to sell will be entirely unsustainable. The growing public backlash and increasing lack of cooperation from opposing nations, neutral states, and even long-time US allies is testament to this.

US War of Terror Continues: Assassinating Iran's Top Anti-ISIS General

January 16, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The US has eagerly taken credit for the killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani amid a series of military strikes carried out by US forces across Syria and Iraq. The assassination was shortly followed by Iranian missile strikes aimed at US bases in Iraq.

The BBC in its article, "Qasem Soleimani: Strike was to 'stop war', says Trump," would claim:

President Donald Trump said the US killed Iran's top military commander Qasem Soleimani "to stop a war, not to start one".

He said Soleimani's "reign of terror is over" following the strike at Iraq's Baghdad airport on Friday.

The strikes also targeted infrastructure supporting a network of Iranian-backed militias known as Popular Mobilization Units or PMUs.

The US claiming these strikes were meant to end "terror" are particularly surreal.

The PMUs along with General Soleimani and his special operations Quds Forces have played a key role in fighting and defeating US and Saudi-sponsored terrorism across the Middle East. This includes fighting terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda, its many affiliates, and the so-called "Islamic State in Iraq and Syris" (ISIS) - all of which have been extensively exposed as recipients of US cash, weapons, and other forms of material and political support.

The War of Terror Continues 

Even the clumsy and often-manipulated Wikipedia lists Iran's Quds Forces as opposed against Al Qaeda, its affiliates, and ISIS alongside nations like the US and its allies. While Wikipedia doesn't overtly connect these terrorist organizations with their Western sponsors it is clear to even the casual observer that both appearing on the Quds Forces' opponents list carries with it many implications.

Beyond mere implications  - however -  it was the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) itself in a 2012 leaked memo that admitted, "the West, Gulf monarchies, and Turkey" were behind the rise of a what at the time was being called a "Salafist principality."

Strikes in Iraq and Syria: US Terror for the New Year

January 13, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) US strikes against targets in Iraq in Syria belonging to Iranian-linked militias operating across the territory of both Middle Eastern nations directly before New Year's marked a new low for US foreign policy in the region.

The strikes were soon followed by the assassination of senior Iranian military leader General Qasem Soleimani who headed Iran's renowned Quds Forces.

The combined provocations have led to a proportionate - and so far effective - counterstrike by Iran aimed at US military bases in Iraq. 

The US is Goading Iran, Not Defending Against It 

CNN in its article, "US strikes 5 facilities in Iraq and Syria linked to Iranian-backed militia," it was reported that:

US forces conducted airstrikes in Iraq and Syria against five facilities the Pentagon says are tied to an Iranian-backed militia blamed for a series of attacks on joint US-Iraq military facilities housing American forces.

The article would also claim:

Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman described the strikes against the group as "precision defensive strikes" that "will degrade" the group's ability to conduct future attacks against coalition forces.

And while the US would describe the strikes as defensive in nature - in reality the US is illegally occupying Syria and is coercing the government of Iraq to accept its open-ended and unwanted occupation there.

Worse still is that the Iranian-backed militias the US struck constitute one of the most formidable forces operating in the region arrayed against terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda, its various affiliates, and the so-called Islamic State in Syria and Iraq (ISIS).

The US narrative of protecting its troops - who occupy the region illegally and in direct contravention to international law - attempts to paper over continued efforts to cling to US hegemony in the Middle East and reverse its flagging fortunes - particularly in Syria where its regime war has unraveled.

Strikes on Iranian-backed militias and their senior leadership are a vain attempt to redraw the quickly changing geopolitical landscape in the Levant where Syria and its allies - particularly Russia and Iran - have come out on top.

Stabbing Iraq in the Back...

All while the US attempts to portray its actions as underwriting regional or even global security - the very nations it has carried out its attacks in have unequivocally condemned them. In Iraq - where there is at least a semblance of legitimacy to America's ongoing occupation, the Iraqi government has described the attacks as treacherous.

The assassination of General Qasem Soleimani  was likewise condemned widely across the region.

Thus - the US has carried unilateral actions inside a nation it attempts to portray as an ally and partner - actions condemned by the Iraqi government itself.

Finally, the CNN article would point out that the recent US strikes represent an escalation between the United States and Iran - amid a wider conflict that spans the region from Syria and Lebanon, to Iraq, to the south in Yemen, and even as far as in Afghanistan where US forces have been waging war for nearly 2 decades along Iran's eastern flank.

Within Iran itself, the US has organized ongoing efforts to destabilize the nation economically and politically aiming to either coerce Tehran or remove the government of Iran entirely.

The irony of the US claiming it is striking Iranian-backed militias in self-defense or in an attempt to combat "terrorism" is multifaceted.

The US which claims to be waging a global war on terror - has just struck the very forces serving as the front line against Al Qaeda and ISIS. Furthermore, when considering the US and its Saudi allies are Al Qaeda and ISIS' primary state sponsors, the irony deepens.

When the nations the US claims it is protecting protest US unilateral actions - nations who are the primary benefactors of Iranian-back militias and their efforts to combat Al Qaeda and ISIS and their terrorism aimed at dividing and destroying their nations and the wider region - US foreign policy and its most recent belligerence lays fully exposed.

One must also consider that US actions serve as one of the most disruptive factors driving ongoing regional instability.

The US continues to isolate itself by doubling down on failed policies - and in the process it is resorting to increasingly dangerous and desperate tactics that threaten regional and global peace and stability. Resorting to high-level assassinations represents a rarely resorted-to measure fully illustrating the growing depths of Washington's desperation.

For nations enduring US belligerence - the process of slowly exposing and countering US foreign policy must continue in earnest. Iran's pinpoint missile strikes aimed at US bases in Iraq, avoiding casualties represents just such patience - a show of force reminding Washington of what could happen if hostilities widen - and a show of restraint illustrating to the rest of the world that Iran is reasonable even in the face of unreasonable provocations.

The US is already increasingly exposed and isolated. For the US which has waged large scale war across the region with diminishing returns - a handful of additional US airstrikes and assassinations will do little to diminish Iranian-backed militias or their ongoing efforts to move the region out from under decades of US hegemony, aggression, terror, division, and destruction.

For the New Year - the US gifts the Middle East with yet more violence and terror - ensuring the region, its nations, and their people labor under no delusions regarding the source of the region's ongoing instability and violence. During the coming new year and the years to come, the process of slowly and surely uprooting US hegemony and all that it entails will continue.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine“New Eastern Outlook”.

The Syrian War: America's "War on Terror" Exposed

December 31, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Syria's Foreign Minister Walid Muallem recently described the US as using the so-called "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" (ISIS) as "a scarecrow" the US uses to menace targeted nations all while secretly encouraging, protecting, and helping them "move from one area to another."

Maullum's comments perfectly encapsulate the twenty-plus year so-called "War on Terror" the US has used to expand itself across the globe militarily and to serve as a stand-in for legitimate economic and political development both within the United States and between the United States and the international community.

Maullum's comments come at a time when - despite Washington's collapsing machinations in Syria - the US is still working to undermine, divide, and destroy the Syrian nation by aiding its enemies while using all political, economic, and military options available to pressure Syria itself.

Muallem was also quoted as saying:

All nations that were victimized by this system need to join forces and resist those sanctions.

In many ways, this is already happening. Russia's intervention in Syria from 2015 onward is part of growing international momentum working against US special interests, their collective hegemony, and the toxic impact it has had not only on international relations and development, but also on the US itself.

From Convincing Pretext to Obvious State-Sponsored Terrorism 

Following the events of September 11, 2001 the United States embarked on a multi-decade "War on Terror." Its invasion of Afghanistan was seen and supported by many nations and their respective populations as a necessary and justified means of combating the scourge that allegedly carried out the deadly attacks on 9/11.

By 2003 - after a time of reflection and in the face of an America eager to spread its "War on Terror" across the globe - it became clear that this "War on Terror" was merely a stand-in to continue America's hegemonic designs pursued during the now concluded Cold War. This included a pretext for NATO's continued existence and the alliance's use by Washington as a means of exerting control over Europe as well as using Europe, its people, and resources to exert influence and control across Africa and Eurasia.

By 2011 and the US interventions in Libya and Syria - it was abundantly clear that not only was the "War on Terror" a false pretext, but it was one artificially created and deliberately perpetuated by Washington itself.

This included revelations that the US had been arming and directing the very Al Qaeda terror network and its affiliates allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks - using them as a virtual mercenary force to target nations the US sought regime change within.

The so-called "rebels" in Libya were little more than Al Qaeda affiliates - poorly dressed as freedom fighters seeking "democracy." These same literal terrorists the US armed and aided in overthrowing the Libyan government in 2011 would be shipped to Syria where the US sought to replicate its "success" in Libya against Damascus.

The war in Syria however failed to produce Washington's desired results - and as the conflict dragged on - through the growth and influence of alternative media - the true nature of America's "War on Terror" emerged.

It is now common knowledge that the United States and its Saudi, Turkish, and Qatari allies deliberately armed Al Qaeda militants and their affiliates in a bid to destabilize and overthrow the Syrian government. It is now also common knowledge that when this bid failed - the US and its allies created ISIS to serve as both an additional pressure point against Damascus as well as a pretext for direct US military intervention.

Today, the US "War on Terror" exists as a mostly empty narrative long-since exposed. Washington's continued efforts against Syria have resulted in even its own allies during the early stages of the war abandoning them - including Turkey - a key NATO member - which now is working closer with Russia and increasingly pursuing a foreign policy independently of Washington.

What Lies in the Future

For Washington - a lack of of a better alternative and its insistence on doubling down on a now exposed and impotent narrative reveals to the world a circle of special interests that are desperately and dangerously spiraling out of control.

Karma: British "White Helmets" Co-Founder Dead in Turkey

November 15, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - Former British military officer James Le Mesurier suspected of ties to MI6 and the co-founder of the so-called "White Helmets" front was found dead this month in Turkey from an apparent fall from his residence.

The Western media wasted no time linking it to claims Russia had recently made that he was an intelligence asset involved in sowing instability worldwide - attempting to portray Russia as somehow likely responsible for Le Mesurier's death.

Not a Rescue Org 

In actuality, the "White Helmets" were an extension of Western armed and funded terrorist organizations operating in Syria with the "White Helmets" specifically serving the purpose of war propagandists thinly disguised as "rescue workers" or local "civil defense."

They found themselves repeatedly at the center of alleged chemical attacks the US accused the Syrian government of - indicating their likely involvement in carrying out false flag operations - many of which may have actually killed real people.

The deceptive manner in which the "White Helmets" operated has already been extensively exposed and their credibility rendered moot - not least because the terrorist organizations they augment are nearing extinction - surrounded in Syria's northern governorate of Idlib.

Dead Spook: Cui Bono? 

Le Mesurier's continued existence as the co-founder of a now irrelevant propaganda arm to a defeated proxy army makes no difference to Syria and its Russian allies.

Le Mesurier's continued existence - however - did pose the perpetual threat of the knowledge he had of covert US operations in Syria including the use of the "White Helmets" in staging chemical attacks and other atrocities and their role in manipulating international organizations like the OPCW eventually becoming public.

It is obvious that his death - whatever the cause - benefited the US and UK which backed him and his faux humanitarian relief organization - meaning that whatever secrets he harbored are now taken to the grave with him.

Work for Horrible People, Meet a Horrible End

Finally, let Le Mesurier's ignominious end serve as a warning for those serving the agenda of global aggressors particularly in the targeting and destruction of a sovereign nation like Syria.

Even upon death, the establishment that bank rolled him and propped him up used his corpse as a prop in their public relations campaigns. The truth of his death may never emerge. With the possibility that he was terminated by his own employers - pause for thought will hopefully reverberate across the peripheral operations created to prop up and promote the "White Helmets."

If someone like Le Mesurier can find himself at the end of his uselessness and likely disposed of by his own employers - what of a former-underwear salesman-turned-war propagandists for NATO or armies of compromised academics?

Anyone who finds themselves in possession of facts and willfully distorts them for profit in the employ of nations willing to lie to promote death and destruction on a global scale cannot possibly believe they are ever safe or will perpetually be more useful alive than dead. Regardless of the actual cause of Le Mesurier's death - he most certainly is more useful to the system that created him and whom he served dead than remaining alive with 8 years of secrets liable to spill out.

Like a gang member working for a violent Central American drug cartel - imagining that you'll serve horrible people involved in a horrible cause and somehow live your life out happy, healthy, and to blissful old age is a fantasy. But perhaps being able to indulge in fantasy is the only way ordinary people can bring themselves to serve enterprises like violent drug gangs or global hegemons in the first place.

Follow Tony Cartalucci on VK here.    

US is the Source of, Not "Solution" to Syrian War

November 12, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - After the supposed US "withdrawal" from Syria - Western media outlets have causally reported on US troops now preparing to occupy Syria's oilfields east of the Euphrates River.

Articles include carefully selected "experts" who avoid any mention of how illegal or indefensible the presence of US forces in Syria is to begin with, let alone any mention of "why" US troops are preparing to "claim" Syria's natural resources.

The Guardian in its piece, "US plans to send tanks to Syria oil fields, reversing Trump troop withdrawal – reports," illustrates a voluntary dereliction of due diligence in investigating or questioning Western actions in Syria.

One is left to assume what the US would claim as its excuse for remaining in Syria - likely based on a narrative of denying terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda or the so-called "Islamic State" (ISIS) and their affiliates access to resources to "fund" their return to the region.

The most obvious and sustainable solution would be to transfer control of Syria's oilfields to Syria itself. Syria has overcome terrorist organizations in all areas Damascus has now restored order to, and with the restoration of its oilfields and related industries, would be in an even better position to both rebuild the nation and defend against the very elements who destroyed it in the first place.

But this assumes that the US is interested in preventing the resurgence of terrorist organizations in the region - ignoring the fact that the US deliberately created them in the first place and deliberately used them to both trigger, then fuel the Syrian war from its very beginning in 2011.

The US is the Source of Syria's War 

As early as 2007, real journalists warned of US plans to bolster opposition groups linked to terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda in a bid to undermine Iran and its ally Syria.

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker article, "The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?," would provide an ominous, but crystal-clear warning of what awaited both Syria and the wider region.

Hersh would warn:

The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

The article would mention the Muslim Brotherhood by name and described specific US support under what was then the Bush administration already being funnelled to the group in Syria.

The Brotherhood is an extremist front with direct ties to Al Qaeda and who were at the epicenter of the supposed "Arab Spring" in 2011. From 2011 onward - then under the Obama administration - US support continued in the form of both financial and military aid.

Articles like the New York Time's, "Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.," would admit to billions of dollars worth of arms from the US flowing into Syria to fuel the destructive war.

Despite Western media claims that the Syrian conflict was being fought between the government and "moderate rebels," the US State Department itself admitted that within the first year of fighting, Al Qaeda had already established a dominate position on the battlefield.

Syria: OPCW Whistleblowers Confirm What We Already Knew

November 5, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Whistleblowers have come forward revealing what many had known all along - that the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had deliberately altered various reports and suppressed evidence regarding alleged chemical weapon attacks in Syria to help bolster US war propaganda.

The Courage Foundation - comprised of various whistleblowers and investigative journalists - in a statement titled, "Panel Criticizes ‘Unacceptable Practices’ in the OPCW’s investigation of the Alleged Chemical Attack in Douma, Syria on April 7th 2018," would conclude (emphasis added):

Based on the whistleblower’s extensive presentation, including internal emails, text exchanges and suppressed draft reports, we are unanimous in expressing our alarm over unacceptable practices in the investigation of the alleged chemical attack in Douma, near the Syrian capital of Damascus on 7 April 2018. We became convinced by the testimony that key information about chemical analyses, toxicology consultations, ballistics studies, and witness testimonies was suppressed, ostensibly to favor a preordained conclusion.

The panel called on the OPCW to revisit its investigation of the alleged 2018 Douma attack, stating:

This would help to restore the credibility of the OPCW and work towards demonstrating its legally mandated commitment to transparency, impartiality and independence. It is of utmost importance to restore trust in the verification procedures relied upon to implement the prohibitions of the CWC [Chemical Weapons Convention].

The panel included a member of the OPCW itself - José Bustani - who in fact served as the first Director General of the OPCW. He would conclude:

“The convincing evidence of irregular behaviour in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirms doubts and suspicions I already had. I could make no sense of what I was reading in the international press. Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at best. The picture is certainly clearer now, although very disturbing.”

A detailed breakdown on precisely what evidence was suppressed can be found here.

Confirming the Obvious

From the beginning, the OPCW's role in Syria was clearly to buttress a US pretext for direct military intervention.

Despite this obvious goal, because many of OPCW staff are professionals and as clearly seen through the actions of whistleblowers coming forward - are principled - the OPCW resorted to very subtle methods to skew the outcomes of its reports and word its conclusions in such a way that media spin could fill in gaps and ambiguity the OPCW itself did not want to directly and overtly lie about.

Despite information within their own reports either indisputably disproving claims of Syria's government using chemical weapons, or admissions that no fact-based claims could even be made with investigators often never even visiting sites where alleged attacks took place, the OPCW would release several politically-motivated conclusions that fed directly into US war propaganda at the time.

The alleged 2018 Douma chemical attack was perhaps the most pertinent example of this, with details of the alleged attack sparse and unconvincing and with the final OPCW report even including a picture taken at a militant weapon's factory where a cylinder similar to those allegedly used in the attack was found among ordnance being prepared for use.

The report also included photographs of the alleged holes made on rooftops from what were claimed to be chemical munitions - but noted that adjacent buildings had similar craters and holes that clearly were not the result of chemical munitions. In other words, evidence suggests the canisters were likely placed into position, taking advantage of holes and craters created by conventional weapons.

Despite evidence suggesting the attack was staged, the OPCW chose to suppress or downplay evidence and use ambiguous language to allow Western media sources to spin the report and "confirm" that not only an attack take place, but that the Syrian government was allegedly behind it.

Only upon reading the actual OPCW report would anyone know just how flimsy accusations against the Syrian government were and that despite Western media headlines accusing the Syrian government, evidence within the report pointed the finger instead at US-backed militants operating in the area at the time.

US Tries to Reverse Syrian Fortunes with "Baghdadi Raid"

October 27, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The Western media is reporting that US military forces have killed the supposed leader of the so-called "Islamic State in Iraq and Syria" (ISIS) in Syria's northern governorate of Idlib.

Newsweek in its article, "Trump Approves Special Ops Raid Targeting ISIS Leader Baghdadi, Military Says He's Dead," claimed:

The United States military has conducted a special operations raid targeting one of its most high-value targets, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State militant group (ISIS), Newsweek has learned. President Donald Trump approved the mission nearly a week before it took place. 

The article also claimed:

Amid reports Saturday of U.S. military helicopters over Syria's northwestern Idlib province, a senior Pentagon official familiar with the operation and Army official briefed on the matter told Newsweek that Baghdadi was the target of the top-secret operation in the last bastion of the country's Islamist-dominated opposition, a faction that has clashed with ISIS in recent years.

Newsweek would include "details" of the supposed raid worthy of a Hollywood action movie finale, claiming:

The senior Pentagon official said there was a brief firefight when U.S. forces entered the compound and that Baghdadi then killed himself by detonating a suicide vest. Family members were present. According to Pentagon sources, no children were harmed in the raid but two Baghdadi wives were killed, possibly by the vest detonation.

As with most every claim the Western media or the US military makes without any sort of evidence, this most recent story cannot or shouldn’t be trusted, especially when there’s little to nothing that can be verified about it.

Timing is Everything 

The supposed military operation - unfolding just miles from the Syrian-Turkish border - comes at a time when the prospects of America's proxy war in Syria have reached all time lows.

First - US proxy forces jointly armed and aided by Turkey as well as other US allies - have been all but eliminated from the battlefield with their remnants residing in Idlib, increasingly encircled by Syrian forces.

Attempts by the US to intervene in Syria directly to oversee the overthrow of the government in Damascus was also thwarted by Russia's military intervention beginning in 2015.

US forces have most recently retreated from the Syrian-Turkish border in Syria's northeast, setting the stage for a joint Russian-Turkish agreement that appears poised to see the disarmament of Kurdish militants or their possible integration into Syria's security forces. The deal also aims at fully restoring Syria's territorial integrity - fully derailing Washington's secondary plans to "Balkanize" Syria.

The Russian-Turkish deal comes at a time when US-Turkish relations are particularly shaky, with Ankara realigning itself within a Middle East emerging out from under decades of US hegemony.

Despite alleged ISIS leader al Baghdadi lurking about Syria and Iraq throughout the duration of Syria's war - why has the US with all its vast resources only now been able to "find" and "eliminate" him? The timing and location couldn't have been better for the US if the entire incident was staged.

And regardless of whether the US staged the operation or not - the truth about who truly created and directed ISIS throughout the duration of the Syrian war - resigns al Baghdadi's death ultimately as theater.

The US Created ISIS to Begin With... 

The US has admittedly spent billions of dollars arming militants throughout the duration of the Syrian war.