Al Qaeda in the White House and its Implications Far Beyond it

November 18, 2025 (NEO - Brian Berletic) - In perhaps 20 years’ time, the Western media will reflect back on the radical shifts in narratives surrounding the head of Al Qaeda in Syria, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani now rebranded and presented as “Ahmed al-Sharaa,” who recently visited the White House and posed for pictures side-by-side an eagerly grinning US President Donald Trump.

Al-Jonali’s rebranding follows that of the terrorist organization he nominally heads, most recently referred to as “Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham” (HTS) but previously known as Jabhat al-Nusra, a notorious terrorist organization heading the US-engineered proxy war against the government, military, and people of the now decimated and divided Syrian Arab Republic.

Side-by-side with the likewise US-sponsored “Islamic State” (ISIS), HTS openly documented its war crimes spanning the 2011-2024 period the US proxy war unfolded. 

By 2025, however, like al-Jolani himself, the terrorist organization he headed previously featured on the US State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, was inexplicably removed.  

 

The Washington Post in its recent article, “Syrian president meets with Trump in White House after unlikely ascent,” depicts the rise of al-Jolani as “improbable,” noting his journey from “al-Qaeda to the West Wing.”  

In reality, this was an entirely probable, even inevitable outcome - considering the history of US state sponsorship of terrorism, al-Qaeda in particular, and the circular pattern depicting the terrorist front as both freedom fighters and villains spanning decades of US proxy wars and outright wars of aggression from Afghanistan in the 1980s to Syria today. 

As in the Past, So Too in the Present… 

Short memories are shocked by recent developments, but considering the trajectory of another infamous al-Qaeda leader, Osama Bin Laden, recent developments seem as natural as the sun rising and setting daily. 

In 2013, Business Insider published an article reflecting this trajectory. Titled, “This Mind-Boggling Profile Of Osama Bin Laden Came Out Exactly 20 Years Ago Today,” would exclaim:

This article from Dec. 6, 1993, by Robert Fisk of The Independent with the title "Anti-Soviet warrior puts his army on the road to peace" is stunning to consider 20 years later. 

Osama bin Laden, fresh off the US-backed mujahedin's victory over Russia in 1989, flew his men, materials, and money down to Sudan, ostensibly to start public works projects.

It then notes: 

The piece is fascinating because it is a positive profile of a man who would become a global terrorist mastermind.

Al-Jolani’s career mirrors that of Osama Bin Laden. Just as a mirrored reflection shows a similar but reverse reflection - al-Jonali has gone from a “terrorist mastermind” with a 10 million USD bounty on his head the US only recently withdrew, to an open ally in America’s continued war for primacy over the Middle East and beyond. 

Just as Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda were originally created and sponsored by the United States government to wage proxy war against its designated adversaries including the Soviet Union (later, against the Russian Federation), China (particularly in Xinjiang), and their partners, al-Jolani and al-Qaeda today (along with ISIS and other extremist organizations) have been and will continue to be used to wage proxy war or serve as a pretext for actual war against Russia, China, and other nations investing in a multipolar future. 

Bigger Picture: Syria as an Epicenter for Exporting US-Sponsored Terrorism  

It is abundantly clear the US will continue backing al-Jolani and the terrorist network now posing as Syria’s new “armed forces” - not to defend Syria - but to continue the fight against US-targeted nations and organizations across the region including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iranian-backed militias in Iraq, and even Iran itself.

Continuity of Agenda: Trump Administration White-Washes Bush-Obama-Biden-backed Al-Qaeda in Syria

May 29, 2025 (NEO - Brian Berletic) - US President Donald Trump announced during his May 2025 trip to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia that the US would be lifting long-standing sanctions on Syria, Reuters reported. 

Reuters would also claim: 

The end of sanctions on Syria would be a huge boost for a country that has been shattered by more than a decade of civil war. Rebels led by current President Ahmed al-Sharaa toppled President Bashar al-Assad last December.

During this same trip, President Trump would also meet and shake hands with the current Syrian president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani who - before taking power - headed the still US State Department-designated foreign terrorist organization  al-Nusrah Front, (now referred to as Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham or HTS).

In reality, the conflict in Syria was not a civil war, but rather a proxy-war waged by the US alongside its Persian Gulf allies, Turkey, and Israel against the Syrian Arab Republic. 

The US sanctions President Trump is now lifting were designed to cripple the Syrian government, economy, and military, prevent reconstruction and economic recovery, and devastate the civilian population, all to hollow out the Syrian state to precipitate its eventual collapse as former US Department of Defense official Dana Stroul stated publicly in 2019. 

The proxy-war included a US-led campaign training, funding, equipping, and arming a network of extremists including al-Sharaa/al-Jolani’s terrorist al-Nusrah/HTS. 

Throughout the conflict in Syria, even US-based publications like the New York Times admitted as early as 2012 the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was facilitating the flow of billions of dollars in weapons, ammunition, and equipment from Turkey into Syria. 

While the official narrative was the US had been arming “moderate rebels,” no explanation was given as to how or why terrorist organizations like al-Nusrah/HTS quickly ended up dominating the Western-backed militancy. If the US and its allies were providing billions in aid to “moderate rebels,” who was providing even greater amounts of aid to extremist organizations allowing them to dominate the US-backed proxy-war in Syria? 

Trump Plays Role in Decades-Spanning Proxy-War Waged by the “Deep State” 

The answer is simple - there were never any “moderate rebels.” The US planned years before the conflict even began to use extremists as proxies to overthrow governments across the region, including Syria’s. 

Seymour Hersh as early as 2007 in his New Yorker article, “The Redirection,” warned: 

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 coöperated 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.

Preparations to build up militant groups as well as their political wings - especially the Muslim Brotherhood  - were already ongoing when Hersh wrote his 2007 article and continued until the US-engineered “Arab Spring” unfolded in 2011 under the Obama administration. 

The New York Times would admit in an April 2011 article that: 

A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington, according to interviews in recent weeks and American diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks.

The same article also admitted: 

The Republican and Democratic institutes are loosely affiliated with the Republican and Democratic Parties. They were created by Congress and are financed through the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 to channel grants for promoting democracy in developing nations. The National Endowment receives about $100 million annually from Congress. Freedom House also gets the bulk of its money from the American government, mainly from the State Department.

The chaos the US-engineered “Arab Spring” created was used as an opportunity to launch multi-wars and proxy-wars across the region including a NATO-led regime change operation against Libya in North Africa, a US-backed Saudi-led coalition targeting Ansar Allah in Yemen, and the US proxy-war in Syria which eventually involved the US invasion and occupation of eastern Syria while NATO-member Turkey invaded and occupied its northern regions. 

US Withdrawal from Syria and Iraq: The Worst-Case Scenario

January 29, 2024 (NEO - Brian Berletic) - Rumors and announcements have swirled recently regarding the presence of US troops in Syria and Iraq, and the prospect of at least a drawdown of troops taking place in one or both locations. This follows escalating violence between local militias and US forces, who have traded missiles and airstrikes amid the ongoing Israeli invasion of Gaza and a resulting decline in regional security.

While the Pentagon was quick to deny claims that US forces might withdraw from Syria, CNN in a January 25, 2024 article, “US and Iraqi governments expected to start talks on future of US military presence in the country,” would note that discussions would “focus on whether and when it will be feasible to end the US military presence in Iraq.”

A similar process took place preceding the eventual withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan in Central Asia, completed in August 2021.

The withdrawal from Afghanistan was interpreted at the time as a symptom of waning US power, and while that may be a contributing factor, other analysts feared it was merely a means of freeing up US resources to expand conflict elsewhere.

This fear was confirmed by US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken during a press conference in December 2022, in which he admitted:

When it comes to Russia’s war against Ukraine, if we were still in Afghanistan, it would have, I think, made much more complicated the support that we’ve been able to give and that others have been able to give Ukraine to resist and push back against the Russian aggression.

It should be noted that the US had been deliberately drawing Russia into a wider conflict in Ukraine for years leading up to Russia’s Special Military Operation. The RAND Corporation in a September 2019 policy paper titled, “Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground,” would include an entire chapter titled, “Provide Lethal Aid to Ukraine,” explaining that:

Expanding U.S. assistance to Ukraine, including lethal military assistance, would likely increase the costs to Russia, in both blood and treasure, of holding the Donbass region. More Russian aid to the separatists and an additional Russian troop presence would likely be required, leading to larger expenditures, equipment losses, and Russian casualties. The latter could become quite controversial at home, as it did when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.

The following month, under the Trump administration, the US would begin supplying Ukraine lethal aid in the form of Javelin anti-tank missiles, ABC News would report. It was clearly the beginning of a policy meant to draw Russia in and draw as much “blood and treasure” from Russia as possible. It was at this time a withdrawal from Afghanistan was under serious consideration. It would begin under the Trump administration and finally be fully implemented under the subsequent Biden administration.

The withdrawal, in hindsight, was a clear prerequisite for freeing up the resources required for the upcoming US proxy war in Ukraine against Russia.

Washington’s Position in Syria Under Fire (Literally)

March 29, 2023 (Brian Berletic - New Eastern Outlook) - In late March a drone strike was carried out in Syria. Not by the United States or Israel, but by forces opposing the illegal US occupation of eastern Syria. The strike left one American contractor dead and several US service members injured.

While the US responded by carrying out airstrikes of its own in Syria against groups Washington claims are linked to the drone strike, the limited response and subsequent attacks on US troops reveals the deep and growing quandary the US has found itself in both in Syria and across the wider Middle East.

Why is the US in Syria in the First Place?  

The US has operated militarily in Syria since 2014, doing so without any United Nations mandate, nor with permission from Syria’s internationally recognized government in Damascus. The US predicates its presence in Syria including its military occupation of eastern Syria on fighting terrorist organizations including the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” (ISIS, is banned in Russia)

In reality, as US Deputy Secretary of Defense for the Middle East Dana Stroul admitted publicly during a Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) event titled, “Syria in the Gray Zone” in 2019, the US military occupation is meant to deprive Syria of its primary agricultural and energy resources, using the freezing and starving of the Syrian population as leverage against both Damascus and its allies including Russia and Iran.

NATO Failure Illustrated by Growing Turkish-Syrian Tensions

June 18, 2022 (Brian Berletic - New Eastern Outlook) - Military activity on all sides has been increasing in northern Syria. Turkish forces are increasing their presence and the pace of operations against Kurdish held territory north of Aleppo and to the east along the Turkish-Syrian border in what may lead up to a major military operation.

The Daily Sabah in an article titled, “Turkey urges Russia to fulfill deals to clear N. Syria of terrorists,” would speak from Turkey’s point of view regarding what Ankara saw as a terrorist threat to Turkish territory, and its expectations of its Russian counterparts in dealing with the situation or, apparently, Turkey will deal with it itself.

The article claims:

Turkey expects Russia to fulfill commitments made in Syria against terrorist organizations and abide by agreements signed in 2019, Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said Wednesday, reiterating Ankara’s call for northern Syria near the Turkish borders to be cleared of terrorist groups threatening security and stability in the region.

Holding a joint press conference with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov in the capital Ankara, Çavuşoğlu said terrorist groups threatening Syria have also upped the ante against Turkey and stressed the need to eliminate them.

Russian military forces as well as their Syrian allies have also increased their activity in northern Syria. The Syrian Arab Army may potentially move into Kurdish-held territory to both act as a deterrent against any possible Turkish offensive, and possibly as a stabilizing factor defusing tensions between Turkey and Kurish fighters.

AP in its article, “US-backed Syrian Kurds to turn to Damascus if Turkey attacks,” would note:

The US-backed and Kurdish-led forces in northern Syria said Tuesday that they will turn to the government in Damascus for support should Turkey go ahead with its threat to launch a new incursion into the war-torn country.

The article also noted:

Erdogan has repeatedly said over the past weeks that he’s planning a major military operation to create a 30-kilometer (19 mile) deep buffer zone inside Syria along Turkey’s border, through a cross-border incursion against US-allied Syrian Kurdish fighters — an attempt that failed in 2019.

Analysts have said Erdogan is taking advantage of the war in Ukraine to push his own goals in Syria — even using Turkey’s ability as a NATO member to veto alliance membership by Finland and Sweden as potential leverage.

The current standoff in northern Syria is one of several crises stemming from the 2011-onward US-led proxy war against Syria. The US and its allies poured billions of dollars in weapons, equipment, and training into opposition forces in an unsuccessful bid to overthrow the government of Syria.

Russia intervened in 2015 at the request of the Syrian government, quickly leveraging its superior airpower and other military capabilities to cut the supply lines of militant groups emanating from both Turkey and Jordan, before assisting Syrian, Iranian, and Lebanese forces in retarking most of Syria’s population centers west of the Euphrates River.

Because of an enduring US military occupation in eastern Syria, Syria’s oil and agricultural land remain in the hands of US-backed forces including Kurdish groups long labelled as terrorists by Turkey.

Turkish Concerns Reflect NATO Dysfunction

The complex contradictions among NATO members like Turkey and the US illustrate a systemic dysfunction within the alliance, rooted first and foremost in how the alliance can serve US interests even (and perhaps especially) at the cost of other NATO members.

This dysfunction has been amplified amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine where the US is leading Europe in economic self-destruction to advance Washington’s agenda versus Moscow.

US 'Airstrike Diplomacy' Continues in Syria-Iraq

July 3, 2021 (Brian Berletic - NEO) - On June 27, 2021 the US carried out additional strikes against targets along the Syrian-Iraqi border. The attacks were condemned by both the Syrian and Iraqi governments and represent not only a dangerous escalation by American military aggression in the region, but the continuation of US aggression in the Middle East spanning two decades regardless of who occupies the White House or Congress. 

A US Department of Defense statement dated June 27, 2021 regarding the US strikes would claim: 

At President Biden's direction, U.S. military forces earlier this evening conducted defensive precision airstrikes against facilities used by Iran-backed militia groups in the Iraq-Syria border region. he targets were selected because these facilities are utilized by Iran-backed militias that are engaged in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) attacks against U.S. personnel and facilities in Iraq.

The statement would also claim: 

We are in Iraq at the invitation of the Government of Iraq for the sole purpose of assisting the Iraqi Security Forces in their efforts to defeat ISIS.

And that: 

As a matter of international law, the United States acted pursuant to its right of self-defense. The strikes were both necessary to address the threat and appropriately limited in scope. As a matter of domestic law, the President took this action pursuant to his Article II authority to protect U.S. personnel in Iraq.

While "assisting Iraqi Security Forces in their efforts to defeat ISIS" is the official excuse for US forces remaining in Iraq - the truth is that US forces have occupied Iraq illegally since the US-led invasion in 2003 which was deemed very much illegal by the UN. 

 

A 2004 Guardian article titled, Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan," would note: 

The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.

Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter.

And despite claims that the US is in Iraq “at the invitation of the Government of Iraq” in a bid to justify its military aggression, the government of Iraq itself has unequivocally condemned the US strikes as a violation of the nation’s sovereignty. 

The New York Times in a June 28, 2021 article titled, “Iraq Condemns U.S. Airstrikes on Iran-Backed Militias,” would report: 

The Iraqi government on Monday condemned U.S. airstrikes on Iranian-backed militias near the Iraqi-Syrian border, and one of the targeted paramilitary groups vowed “open war” against American interests in Iraq.

The New York Times also notes that the militias targeted by the US and characterized as “Iranian-backed” are actually “on the [Iraqi] government payroll.” 

A Decade On: West's War on Syria Continues

June 3, 2021 (Brian Berletic - LD) - As Syrian elections approached, the US, France, and Germany  worked together to undermine them.  This was not because they truly believed the elections weren't “free and fair,” but simply because there is no possibility for their client regime of choice to come to power. 

This is despite these same Western nations - hand-in-hand - lecturing the world about “democracy,” and using its alleged "lacking" as a pretext to interfere in the affairs of nations worldwide. 

The true irony is - even as the UN condemns pressure placed on Syrian voters by factions in Lebanon - the UN appears reluctant to condemn similar pressure or outright restrictions the West is placing on Syrians to likewise inhibit their ability to vote. 

AP in an article titled, "Lebanese attack Syrian voters in sign of growing resentment," 

UNHCR said it received reports of intimidation and pressure, according to Lisa Abou Khaled, a spokesperson for the agency, adding that the agency was looking into it “to ensure that refugees are free to decide whether or not to vote.”

The same AP article would claim: 

France and Germany banned any voting at Syrian missions in their country, with a French Foreign Ministry official saying the elections are “null and void” and there is no point in holding them.

No mention is made by AP about what the UNHCR has said - if anything - about outright restrictions on voting placed on Syrians residing in France and Germany - restrictions that surely infringe on Syrian refugees and their right to decide "whether or not to vote." 

Despite these Western nations posing as self-appointed global arbiters of what is and isn't a legitimate election - democracy is a process of self-determination and for Syrians that means a process determined by and for Syrians - not the foreign ministries of France and Germany and certainly not the US State Department. 

Ten Years On: The West's War on Syria Continues

Ten years on since the US launched its proxy regime change war against Syria - the Western media continues claiming the ongoing conflict is a "civil war." 

It is this fundamental lie that is used to not only justify the latest round of suppressing Syrian voters, but Western intervention in Syria altogether. 

AP would claim: 

Syria has been engulfed in civil war since 2011, when Arab Spring-inspired protests against the Assad family rule turned into an armed insurgency in response to a brutal military crackdown.

Yet since as early as 2011 the Western media has piecemeal admitted to the US-engineered nature of both the so-called "Arab Spring" and the fact that the war in Syria was driven by US-armed militants flooding into the country, not "rising up" from within. 

US Seeks to Prolong Terrorism in Syria, Not Defeat It

October 17, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Recent attacks on Syrian positions from terrorists of the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS) and the release of thousands of prisoners in US-occupied eastern Syria illustrate how Washington is demonstratably prolonging instability in Syria as part of its promise to transform the nation into a "quagmire" for Russia and Iran. 

Newsweek itself, in an article titled, "U.S. Syria Representative Says His Job Is to Make the War a 'Quagmire' for Russia," had admitted earlier this year that: 

The U.S. special representative for Syria has urged continued American deployment to the war torn country in order to keep pressure on U.S. enemies and make the conflict a "quagmire" for Russia.

The article further elaborated: 

Assad—who now controls the majority of the country—is backed by Russia and Iran, both of which the U.S. is trying to undermine. Jeffrey said Tuesday that the U.S. strategy will both weaken America's enemies while avoiding costly mission creep.

"This isn't Afghanistan, this isn't Vietnam," he explained. "This isn't a quagmire. My job is to make it a quagmire for the Russians."

Toward that end - efforts in US-occupied eastern Syria to properly deal with ISIS prisoners and their family members has been neglected - creating conditions aimed at breeding extremism rather than defusing it. Even the Washington Post - in a recent article titled, "Kurdish-led zone vows to release Syrians from detention camp for ISIS families," would admit: 

Conditions inside al-Hol displacement camp, a sprawl of tents perched in the desert west of Hasakah city, have alarmed humanitarian groups and in some cases aided the radicalization of women and children who spent years under Islamic State rule.

The "release" is depicted by the Western media as lacking planning - however - if the goal of the US is to compound Syria's crisis rather than help resolve it - releasing thousands of prisoners - many of whom are likely only further radicalized - is the plan. 

US media also reported on a major and recent clash between Syrian forces and ISIS militants requiring the use of Russian airpower to repel. 

America's Broken Syria Project

September 22, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - A recent altercation between Russian forces and US occupiers in northeastern Syria helped highlight the increasingly tenuous position Washington holds not only in Syria but across the entire Middle East. 

After attempting to block Russian military vehicles, US forces found themselves being literally plowed out of the way with overwhelming Russian airpower hovering overhead. 

After complaining that American troops were "injured" in the incident and condemning Russia for "unsafe and unprofessional actions," the United States announced that it was deploying more troops and military equipment to bolster its illegal occupation of Syrian territory. 

The US also claimed its continued presence in Syria officially seeks to confront and eliminate the self-proclaimed "Islamic State" (ISIS), but official accounts maintained by the US government and the US Department of Defense on an almost daily basis provide a wide and every-shifting number of excuses. 

On September 20th "Inherent Resolve's" Twitter account would announce: 

Bradley Fighting Vehicles provide the rapid flexibility needed to protect critical petroleum resources.

The region the US occupies is also where the majority of Syria's petroleum is extracted and America's "protection" of these resources is part of a wider strategy - not to fight ISIS - but to deny the Syrian state which has eliminated ISIS from all territory it controls - both energy and revenue from its own natural resources.  

In essence, the US is in Syria weakening the Syrian government who has led the fight against ISIS and provoking confrontations with Russia who has been key in aiding Damascus against ISIS, Al Nusra, and other affiliates of Al Qaeda. 

The US had been in Syria a full year before Russia's invitation by Damascus to aid in security operations against ISIS and Al Qaeda affiliates in 2015. The Russian military promptly began bombing supply lines feeding ISIS and other terrorist groups from across the Syrian border in Turkey. ISIS' fighting capacity rapidly collapsed and remains isolated in pockets made inaccessible by America's continued occupation of Syrian territory. 

A Microcosm of America's Wider MENA Failure

The confrontation with Russia and the decision to boost America's military presence in Syria is but a microcosm of America's wider struggle to maintain its invasive primacy over the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). 

Despite beginning the 21st century with an overwhelming military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq and expanding its involvement in the region in 2011 through the US-engineered "Arab Spring" - US power and influence has visibly waned. Its attempts to control virtually every aspect of Iraq's internal politics has faltered in the face of Iraqis seeking alternative ties with neighboring Iran. 

US War Propaganda Still Aims at Syria

August 27, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - While US regime change in Syria appears to be a terminal failure, various propaganda ploys used to sell the war continue in the hopes that - at the very least - such ploys can be polished and improved upon when and where the US turns its attention next.

One of these ploys includes an ongoing "trial" in Germany against Syrians accused of war crimes.

Al Jazeera in an article titled, "World's first Syria torture trial opens in Germany," would claim:

The world's first trial of a senior member of the Syrian military for war crimes got under way in Germany on Thursday, despite ongoing restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  

The accused - Anwar Raslan, a former colonel in the Syrian military, and co-defendant Eyad al-Gharib, who allegedly worked under Raslan, had been living in Germany as refugees and were arrested in February last year.

Al Jazeera would add:

"The trial will provide an overall picture of the crimes committed by the Syrian government," Wolfgang Kaleck, a lawyer whose Berlin-based organisation, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, will represent 16 witnesses - Syrian survivors of torture and former detainees - said in a statement before the trial.

The article also notes that:

Germany is using a legal principle called universal jurisdiction to trial Raslan and al-Gharib.

This allows German prosecutors to work on war crimes cases, whether they have a close connection to Germany or not.

Universal jurisdiction could result in an alternative means for the international community to bring war criminals to account.

Abusing universal jurisdiction for war propaganda would be a valuable tool in the hands of the United States and its Western allies who find themselves increasingly unable to find approval and support for various wars of aggression, interventions, and regime change campaigns within the halls of international organizations like the United Nations.

It should be noted that Al Jazeera is owned and operated by the Qatari government - one of several governments directly involved in the aiding and arming of US-backed militants attempting to overthrow the Syrian government. This may help explain a lack of scrutiny in the article of the trial and those involved - particularly a lack of inquiry into the so-called "European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights" (ECCHR).

Accusers with Dubious Backgrounds

The ECCHR is funded by the same handful of organizations which helped organize protests in Syria before and during 2011 as well as propaganda campaigns throughout the conflict ever since.

The ECCHR claims to be supporting the "witnesses" testifying at the trial who include movie director Feras Fayyad. Fayyad has been promoted widely across the West for his "documentaries" including "The Cave" and "Last Men in Aleppo" - which also by no coincidence fed directly into US war propaganda efforts.

Attempts by the US under President Donald Trump to bar his travel to the US served as a public relations stunt ensuring maximum exposure for both Fayyad and his war propaganda.

ECCHR sponsors include US-based billionaire and convicted financial criminal George Soros' Open Society Foundation as well as the Freedom Fund which in turn is directly funded by both the US and British governments via the United States Department of State and the United Kingdom Home Office respectively.

Both the US and the UK admittedly helped prepare agitators years in advance before the 2011 conflict began in Syria.

Caesar Act: Protecting or Destroying Syrian Civilians?

Another US "Act" that hides behind human rights while compounding conflict and the destruction of all lives caught within it. 

July 23, 2020 (Salman Rafi Sheikh - NEO) - The so-called US “Civilian Protection Act” does everything except “protect” the people of Syria. If anything, it aims, what a draconian law would normally do, to further destroy and strangulate the Syrian economy to make the country’s post-war economic reconstruction and development even more difficult. 

As the act’s “statement of policy” states in explicit terms, the US continues to seek a “regime change” in Syria. Indeed, the cardinal US purpose behind igniting a “civil war” in Syria was always to “send Assad home”, but the combined military strategy of Syria, Iran and Russia turned out to be the key to defeating the CIA–sponsored militant groups. The US, as it stands, continues to pursue the same objective, although its military defeat in Syria has forced it to shift its focus from direct military intervention and support for militant groups to economic sanctions.

While this is not for the first-time that sanctions have been imposed on Syria, the fact that this “protection act” expands the US reach to even non-Syrians i.e., Syrian’s “foreign friends” (Russia, China, Iran) makes it an even worst attack on Syrian economy. This is in turn part of an officially declared US strategy to make Syria a “quagmire for Russia.”

The aim is two-fold: to restrict the ability of Syria’s foreign friends to freely pour money into Syria’s reconstruction economy, and to exacerbate even further the already extremely poor conditions. With famine already knocking on the doors of Syria, fresh US sanctions will only deteriorate the economic conditions, which have already forced about 83 percent of Syrians to live below the poverty line.

The Syrian pound, which held steady at around 500 to the US dollar for several years, went into free fall last year, hitting a low of 3,000 in June, in anticipation of fresh sanctions. That currency drop is hindering Assad’s plans for buying up all of this year’s wheat to make up for a shortfall in imports that is drawing down on strategic reserves.

What, according to the UN itself, Syria needs is “immediate and substantial injection of funds, life-saving provisions of food, water, health care”, what, however, it gets from the West is extensive sanctions and, what Mike Pompeo called, continued US “stabilisation activities in northeast Syria” where most of Syria’s oil wells are located. Whereas the oil could prove crucial for Syria’s economic recovery, this is obviously not what the US wants to see happening in Syria. Accordingly, an “oil disaster” under the US auspicious is already looming large in northeast Syria.

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.

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-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.