by Mike Whitney
December 03, 2015
You know the country has really gone to the dogs when Washington's
main allies in its war on Syria are the two biggest terrorist
incubators on the planet.
I'm talking about Saudi Arabia and
Turkey, both of which are run by fanatical Islamic zealots devoted
to spreading violent jihad to the four corners of the earth. Not
that the US doesn't have blood on its hands too.
It does, but that's beside the point.
The point is that if you're trying to sell your fake war on terror
to the public, then you might want to think twice about lining up
with Grand Sultan Erdogan and King Chop-Chop of Riyadh.
The optics alone should have sent the
White House PR team running for cover. I mean, couldn't they have
hired squeaky-clean Iceland to join the fray just to persuade the
public that the ongoing proxy war wasn't a complete sham. Which it
It all goes to show that no one in the administration really gives a
rip about appearances anymore.
Obama is going to do what he wants to do, and if you
don't like it: Tough!
Isn't that the message? Of course it is.
But just look how that apathy transfers
itself into other areas of governing like, let's say, strategic
Take Syria for example, where the think
tank pundits were given the task of coming up with a plan to topple
a secular regime without:
triggering a violent insurgency
igniting massive antiwar
demonstrations around the world
producing hundreds or thousands
of US casualties
In other words, our esteemed leaders
didn't want another Iraq which is understandable.
Anyway, that was the basic assignment. So the think tankers came up
with this brilliant plan to enlist Sunni militants that the CIA
would fund, arm, train and deploy into Syria to shoot the place
up, raise holy hell, and then topple the regime of Syrian President
Bashar al Assad.
That was the plan, at least...
Four and half years later, the place is a worse mess than Iraq. Half
the population is either dead or internally displaced, the civilian
infrastructure is a shambles, and nothing has been achieved.
Assad is safely tucked away in Damascus,
the jihadi proxies are on the run, and everyone hates the US more
Great plan, eh? Where's the downside?
The downside is that now Washington finds itself backed against the
wall with precious few options that don't involve a direct
confrontation with Moscow. Of course, all of this could have been
avoided had the White House been more eager to negotiate a
settlement to the conflict months earlier in Vienna.
But, instead, the bullheaded Obama
team decided to stick with its dreary "Assad must go" mantra
which put the kibosh on any long-term agreement or ceasefire
So now, the Russian-led coalition has
made significant gains on the ground, retaking numerous key cities,
highways and airbases in the west and south while sending US-backed
terrorists fleeing eastward towards Raqqa.
These developments have forced
Washington into a fallback position that will likely entail
air-support for Turkish ground forces who will be deployed to
Northern Syria to take and hold area sufficient for a "safe zone",
which is an innocuous sounding moniker the media invokes to conceal
the fact that Turkey plans to annex sovereign Syrian territory
which, by the way, is an act of war.
Now fast-forward to last week...
Why, you may ask, does Obama want Turkey
to close the border now when the horse has already left the barn?
What I mean is that the White House
has known for over 3 years that the bulk of the
jihadis were transiting Turkey on their way to Syria, just like they
knew that ISIS's oil was being transported across Turkey.
They knew it all because they have their
damn spy satellites and AWACs circling overhead.
In fact, they could probably tell you
how many bumblebees crossed the border at any given time, so they
sure as heck saw the throngs of bearded roughnecks moving southward
So why is it so urgent to close the
border now, after all, the damage is already done, right?
Could it have something to do
with the fact that Putin's legions are moving north to seal
Could there be an alternate
objective, for example, could the US and Turkey be setting
the stage for an incursion into Syria that would secure the
land needed for the glorious safe zone?
That's what most of the analysts seem to
think, at least the ones that haven't been co-opted by
the mainstream media.
But why is NATO suddenly getting
involved? What's that all about? After all, Putin was reluctant to
even commit his air-force to the Syrian conflict. It's not like he's
planning to invade Turkey or something, right?
Of course he's not thinking of invading Turkey. That would pit
Russia against NATO in a planet-incinerating fight-to-the-death.
That might please
some of the crackpots in Washington,
but just about everyone else would rather avoid the mushroom cloud
So, what's really going on?
For that, we turn to Moon of Alabama that provides this excellent
summary in a recent post titled: "The Real 'Terrorist Sympathizers'
Want to Wage War on Syria… and Russia".
Here's an excerpt:
"Who initiated this sudden rush
within major NATO governments to get parliamentary blank checks
for waging a long war on Syria? Not only in the UK but also in
France and Germany?
The German government turned on a dime from "no military
intervention in Syria ever" to "lets wage a war of terror on
Syria" without any backing from the UN or international law...
Who initiated this? A simple, medium
size terror attack in Paris by some Belgians and French can not
be the sole reason for this stampede.
Did Obama call and demand support for his plans? What are these?
I smell that a trap is being laid, likely via a treacherous
Turkey, to somehow threaten Russia with, or involve it in, a
wider war. This would include military attacks in east-Ukraine
or Crimea as well as in Syria.
Obama demanded European backing in
case the issue gets out of hand. No other reason I have found
explains the current panic. The terrorists the "west" supports
in Syria are in trouble.
The real terrorist sympathizers need
to rush to their help. It is a start of all-out war on Syria and
its Russian protectors."
Sympathizers" Want to Wage War on Syria… and Russia",
Moon of Alabama)
Is that what's going on?
Has Turkish President Erdogan
figured out how to hoodwink the NATO allies into a confrontation
with Russia that will help him achieve his goal of toppling Assad
and stealing Syrian territory?
It's hard to say, but clearly something has changed, after all,
neither France, nor Germany nor the UK were nearly as gung-ho just a
few weeks ago. Now they're all hyped-up and ready for WW3.
Why is that...?
Ahh, Grasshopper, that is the mystery, a mystery that was unraveled
in an op-ed that appeared in the Tuesday edition of the Turkish
newspaper Hurriyet Daily News.
Here's the excerpt:
"The increase in military
cooperation within NATO countries against ISIL and the piling up
of NATO forces near Turkey's border with Syria take place in
parallel with the recent deal between Ankara and the Brussels
over Syrian refugees and the re-activation of Turkey's EU
forces pile up on Turkey-Syria border", Hurriyet)
Okay, so Erdogan worked out a deal with
the other NATO countries. Why is that such a big deal?
Well, check out this blurb from the Today's Zaman:
Erdogan's advisor, Burhan Kuzu,
summed it up even more succinctly saying: "The EU finally got
Turkey's message and opened its purse strings. What did we say?
'We'll open our borders and unleash all the Syrian refugees on
you'," Kuzu stated in his controversial tweet…
bows to Turkey's threat on refugees says Erdoğan advisor",
Blackmail...? Is that what we're talking
It sure sounds like it.
Erdogan intentionally releases tens
of thousands of Syrian refugees into Europe to put pressure on
EU politicians who quickly lose the support of their people and
face the meteoric rise of right wing parties.
And then, the next thing you know,
Merkel, Hollande and every other EU leader is looking to cut a
deal with Erdogan to keep the refugees in Turkey.
Isn't that how it all went down...?
Except we're missing one important
factoid here, because according to the first op-ed,
"The increase in military
cooperation within NATO… and the piling up of NATO forces near
Turkey's border… took place in parallel with the deal between
Ankara and the Brussels."
So there was a quid pro quo that
no one wants to talk about...
In other words, Germany,
France and the UK agreed to support Erdogan's loony plan
to conduct military operations in Syria, risking a serious dust-up
with Russia, in order to save their own miserable political
Boy, if that doesn't take the cake, than I don't know what does...