Planned Regime Change in Syria
Politics / US Politics Mar 03, 2012 - 02:23 PM GMTBy: Stephen_Lendman
Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now Syria had peace and calm until Washington intervened belligerently.
Strategies and tactics vary. Objectives are consistent. They involve replacing independent regimes with pro-Western ones by any means, including war.
Three unwinnable ones rage. Nonetheless, Obama plans more. Syria's target one. For the past year, US-instigated violence ravaged parts of the country. Thousands have been killed, many others injured.
Syria's gripped by fear. Heavily armed killer gangs rage out of control, and direct foreign intervention looms. More on that below.
Assad's wrongly blamed. The blame game targets victims, not villains. As a result, ongoing conflict continues.
February 26 was potentially historic. Syrians overwhelmingly approved constitutional reform. Only the fullness of time will tell if promised change, in fact, happens. Western intervention may prevent it.
After 90% of Syrians supported draft constitutional changes, Assad issued decree No. 94 officially approving it, effective February 27.
Russia's Foreign Ministry said referendum results show Syrians support him. Moscow called on all sides to concur, stop violence, and engage in dialogue with no preconditions.
On February 27, in an article titled "Russia and the Changing World," Vladimir Putin noted similarities between Syria and Libya. He warned against foreign intervention.
He called Arab Spring changes replacement of one force for another. In other words, everything changed by stayed the same, and in countries like Egypt, got worse. He said "Moscow won't allow anyone to repeat the Libyan scenario in Syria."
Washington's hell bent on initiating it. Obama asked international leaders to protect Syrians from "abhorrent" (US instigated) violence. Calling for regime change, he said Assad('s rule) must come to an end."
Russian and Chinese Security Council vetoes thwarted his UN strategy. Hillary Clinton called doing so "despicable." She represents the worst of US lawlessness. Shamelessly attacking Russia and China shows how low America has sunk.
Security Council passage assured replicating Libyan style intervention. As a result, Obama plans circumventing UN Charter authority entirely.
Throughout the conflict, Washington's been involved in arming insurgent killer gangs. Congressional hawks call openly for doing it.
On February 25, Israel's YNet News headlined, "US to announce aerial blockade on Syria." Citing the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat Arabic international newspaper, it said Pentagon officials "call for the establishment of a buffer zone on the Turkish border, in order to receive Syrian refugees."
Buffer zones replicate no-fly ones. Military protection's needed. Doing so involves eliminating command and control sites belligerently. In stark terms, it means war. Humanitarian intervention's cover to wage it.
America doesn't give a damn about protecting civilians and never did. It cares only for unchallenged dominance. Wars become the strategy of choice. When waged, mass deaths, destruction, and human misery follow.
YNet said "intercession is to be modeled after NATO's" Yugoslavia war. It's "plan of action included prolonged aerial shelling."
In 1999, for 78 days, around 600 aircraft flew about 3,000 sorties. Thousands of tons of ordnance were dropped, as well as hundreds of ground-launched cruise missiles. Up to then, the campaign's ferocity was unprecedented.
Nearly everything was struck, causing massive destruction and disruption. Included were known or suspected military sites; power plants; factories; transportation; telecommunications facilities; vital infrastructure, including roads, bridges and rail lines; fuel depots; schools; a TV station; China's Belgrade Embassy; hospitals; government offices; churches; historic landmarks; and more in cities and villages throughout the country.
It was lawless aggression portrayed as humanitarian intervention. Around $100 billion in damage was caused. Environmental contamination was extensive. Mass deaths and injuries occurred. Many others were displaced.
Millions lost livelihoods, many others their homes, communities, and futures under military occupation. It always happens when America shows up. Washington plans it for Syria, then Iran.
Pentagon officials anticipate no Moscow or Beijing change of heart. But they expect both nations to support humanitarian aid efforts, including a ceasefire and UN monitors to determine conditions on the ground.
Doing so requires "aerial protection, which would eventually lead to an aerial blockade" and belligerence. Obama supports it saying "every available tool" will be used to end bloodshed.
Of course, calling off his dogs would do it. Instead, protracted conflict continues. Daily body count numbers increase. Civilians always suffer most.
Major Media Back Intervention
When America goes to war or plans it, major media scoundrels cheerlead supportively. Rule of law principles and human carnage aren't considered, just imperial aims.
Former State Department official Anne-Marie Slaughter got feature New York Times op-ed space. Her "How to Halt the Butchery in Syria" commentary followed.
It shamelessly urged arming killer gangs, and called foreign military intervention "the best hope for curtailing a long, bloody and destabilizing civil war."
She also favors "no-kill zones." Pentagon officials call them "buffer zones." They assure war if established.
In addition, she supports sending in Special Forces from neighboring and Western countries. Of course, they've been there for months, supporting insurgents along with CIA and MI6 elements.
Slaughter, of course, wants Libyan style regime change and war replicated. Her name reflects her view.
Times op-ed contributor Roger Cohen also wants Syrian insurgents armed. He blames thousands of deaths on Assad, not responsible Western-backed killer gangs. He's for providing them more firepower to cause many more deaths.
Times op-ed space features reprehensible commentaries like his, Slaughter's, and many others. At the same time, responsible voices are shut out.
Cohen supports proxy war. "Arm Syria's rebels," he says. His convoluted logic believes ending violence depends on increasing it. In other words, killing's good, the more the better, so supply insurgents with heavy firepower to reign greater terror on defenseless civilians.
Blame Assad, and unleash NATO to replicate Libyan style charnel house devastation and protracted violence without end. Cohen calls doing it "a no-brainer."
Washington Post contributor Jackson Diehl uses similar reasoning in his op-ed headlined, "Why the US should arm the Syrian opposition."
He also said America "has reason to provide material support for the Syrian opposition precisely so it can be a player in Syria if and when Assad" falls.
He knows little about America's longstanding Middle East agenda. Unchallenged dominance is planned, using war as a strategic weapon of choice.
Expect it in Syria, then Iran, no matter the potentially catastrophic consequences. Only dominance matters, not the toll.
A Final Comment
On February 27, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) convened its 19th regular session in Geneva. It runs until March 23. Syria dominated emergency Tuesday discussions. Mostly one-sided views were presented.
An Arab League/Turkey resolution will be adopted condemning "use of heavy artillery and tanks to attack residential areas....that have led to the death of thousands of innocent civilians." It accuses Assad of "widespread and systematic violations."
Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov called debate counterproductive because of its "confrontational nature," adding:
"The important thing today is that we give a chance to the Syrians themselves to overcome this crisis."
"Today it is clear aims to instill democracy through force are doomed to disaster and achieve the opposite. What is important today is that we do not allow for a full scale civil war in Syria."
The 47-member body met to condemn Syria, not judge conditions on the ground impartially and fairly. Syria's Permanent HRC Representative, Fayssal Al-Hamwi, denounced its manipulative procedure and violation of procedural rules.
He said:
"We reaffirm to all those alleged friends of the Syrian people that the simple step to immediately help the Syrian people is to stop inciting sectarianism, providing arms and weapons and funding and putting the Syrian people one against the other."
"Unjust and unilateral sanctions imposed by some countries on the Syrian people are preventing access to medicines, to fuel in all forms as well as electricity, and are also impeding bank transfers to buy these materials." ''Unilateral economic sanctions are the ugliest violations of human rights, because they target foremost civilian populations including children, women and the elderly."
He added:
"We're convinced that the true goal of holding today's session is covering up the violence and murder committed by armed terrorist groups against innocent civilians which were clearly mentioned by Agence France-Presse on February 25."
Through February 9, he said armed groups attacked 18 hospitals, 48 health centers and 129 ambulances.
Before walking out in protest, Al-Hamwi announced Syria's "non-acknowledgement of the legitimacy of this session." It convened to vilify Assad, not judge him and killer gang caused conditions on the ground fairly.
By Stephen Lendman
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com
Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached in Chicago at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday through Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national topics. All programs are archived for easy listening. © 2012 Copyright Stephen Lendman - All Rights Reserved Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.
© 2005-2022 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.
