NEO – The US is threatening Syria – Alexander Orlov

The US is threatening Syria: another “possible attack”?

… by  Alexander Orlov, …with  New Eastern Outlook, Moscow

We never heard anything from the Syrian National Council about these executions.

[ Editors Note:  Mr. Orlov gives us a very good review of card shark diplomacy being played by Obama and Kerry.

Now that the chemical weapons are removed from Syria in one of the diplomatic triumphs of this century so far,  one for the Russians that is, the US is now trying to bury that memory.

It won’t work, and Obama is making himself look small by waving the big stick. Whoever on his staff sold him on playing Teddy Roosevelt should be shot on the White house lawn. Such cheap theatrics are not an image polisher, but a stain.

I have been writing here and in other forums and interviews that the West will try to salvage victory from their disastrous Syria policy by carrying the war right into the negotiations. They seem to be copying the Israeli style, where their WMD stockpiles and a good track record of killing civilians is always a gun to be pointed at someone’s head.

The US has been hoping the suffering of the Syrian refugees would eventually collapse their support for Assad. They have been used as hostages really, something else that is also a cheap thing to do, and proof that the greatness of America is slipping through our fingers, except for the spinmeister drivel. 

The Syrian people know whom their major enemies are, and America is right up at the top with the Israelis and Saudis, Qatar and Turkey.

They know who has paid for the arms and ammunition that has been killing them, and how silent the West has been over the atrocities of their proxy terrorists. 

If the Western leaders think they can ‘spin’ their way out of this, it is just one more example of how they are living in an Alice and Wonderland dream world. This is a classic symptom of those you can predict will never take any responsibility for the carnage they leave in their wake.

It is long past time to consider making sure they are also left in the ditches of their own disasters. There would at least be that justice for the victims… Jim W. Dean ]

_____________________________

–  First published  February 14, 2014  –

Washington resumed its war rhetoric against Syria on February 10, when Obama reaffirmed at a press conference that was held after his meeting with French President Francois Hollande his readiness to use force against Damascus. “I always say that I reserve the right to do it,” he said.

Obama also stated that last autumn a military operation was considered to be suitable. However, he added that the only way to settle the Syrian issue is by political means. “War is no solution, but the situation is very unstable — it is dangerous not only for Syria, but for the entire region,” Obama said.

The aggressive rhetoric of the American president is nothing new. In September 2013 the U.S. authorities were actively discussing the possibility of launching a missile strike against Syria, but Russia offered an alternative solution that implied the elimination of the Syrian chemical stockpiles. It was a popular belief at the time that Russia saved the United States from yet another pointless conflict.

There were those who looked at this picture differently. They believe that Moscow folded to the Washington bluff of engaging in a full-scale military conflict in the Middle East while it was pursuing a different goal — to pressure Syria by both military threats and diplomatic means into destroying its chemical stockpiles, which was the only serious deterrent factor in the Syrian defence.

In addition, Israel is in no losing position here. It has always considered the Syrian WMD arsenal as the only real obstacle to a possible war against Damascus, especially if the latter is to be invaded by Islamic extremists.

And it was Russia that persuaded the Syrians to destroy chemical stockpiles, assuming that by doing so it saves Damascus from allied aerial attacks. In either way, the only winners of the elimination of the Syrian WMD are the U.S. and Israel.

When the destruction of chemical stockpiles picked up steam, Washington decided to throw off the mask and start blackmailing Assad again by statements about the possible air strikes on Syria, but this time around this poor country has no counterargument, since the potential means of retaliation are already eliminated.

The American president went on, pointing a finger at Russia as a country that supposedly should bear all responsibility for the prompt destruction of the Syrian chemical arsenal, although the UN Security Council Resolution explicitly states that the OPCW bears it.

But the US Chief Executive bluntly said that “Russia has a responsibility to ensure that Syria complies.”

Earlier, the UN Security Council expressed dissatisfaction with delays in the shipments of the chemical substances, the OPCW had to explain that the delays occurred due to technical reasons and problems with security.

With the attempts to throw Damascus under the bus, Obama is once again trying to put the Syrian government in a bad light, deliberately diverting international attention away from his own guilt in the delay. After all the American MV Cape Ray with two Field Deployable Hydrolysis Systems on board can only arrive to the Mediterranean Sea in the second half of February, and in these circumstances it would be utterly irrational to move the Syrian WMD from the well-protected sites to a less secure port, Latakiya.

The first pile was shipped from Syria on January 7, the second on January 27, and the third on February 10. The experts from Russia, USA, China, Syria, and those representing the United Nations have drawn a road map in Moscow which would allow the fleets engaged to ensure safe evacuation of Syrian chemical weapons on December 27.

In January and February, the Russian cruiser “Peter the Great”, in collaboration with the Chinese, Danish and Norwegian seamen, successfully completed tasks of ensuring a safe transportation of Syrian chemical weapons to the locations of its destruction.

The American rhetoric of the possible usage of force against Syria has been traditionally reiterated by the European allies of the US. The foreign ministers of the European Union are considering the possible transfer of the Syrian frozen assets to the OPCW.

This was noted by the head of the EU diplomacy, Catherine Ashton on February 11. “We decided to make sure that assets frozen in the EU could be invested into the OPCW fund to help with the removal and destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons,” said Ashton in Brussels.

But that’s illegal! On what ground can the EU withdraw funds of a sovereign state and transfer them to a third party? These sanction initiatives strongly resemble those that were taken three years against Libya, whose accounts were also frozen by the EU.

For sure, we can assume that President Obama made his statement about the possible military scenario in Syria to cajole Francois Hollande who seems to be extremely hostile towards Damascus, just like his predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy towards Libya. But back then it was clear – the Libyans threatened Sarkozy to publish a dossier which would prove that Tripoli’s financial aid allowed Sarkozy to hold his presidential campaign . And Sarkozy could find no better way of keeping them quiet than wiping Libya off the map together with its leaders, which employed the use of truly barbaric methods.

And how about Hollande? Was somebody paying for his future presidency too? In his case the reasons are even simpler — the French leader is trying to show value for the Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE money, in hopes of getting generous economic infusions and military contracts in exchange for his support of all anti-Syrian activities.

But that’s not all. It looks like Obama is starting to test the public opinion in the U.S. to have a “plan B” in case the talks between the Syrian government and the opposition in Switzerland go nowhere.

And it seems to be a likely scenario, since the breakdown of the settlement process is just around the corner. The first round of negotiations has gone nowhere and the second one provides no ground for optimism. The opposition has been actively torpedoing any positive gestures by Damascus to show their Persian Gulf, U.S. and Turkish sponsors that they are not getting paid for nothing.

And now we’ve got Saudi Arabia nervously purchasing new weapons. Should Saudis be preparing for a war, it is clear they will not be fighting Iran this time, since the armed forces of the latter are simply risking to annihilate the entire Saudi forces. It seems to be far more convenient for the Saudis to invade Syria and fight against Syrian troops at their leisure, together with the Turkish army under the US aerial umbrella.

So the statement made by Obama shouldn’t be ignored, since his words may be followed by deeds. Therefore, Damascus should be closely monitoring all statements made by the US Chief Executive and be prepared for a new military escalation over Syria this Spring.

The conflict in Syria is in its fourth year. Everyone is tired. The opposition is not able to defeat the government. Terrorist attacks have strongly discredited Islamists.

The shift is inevitable now. Therefore, it is possible that, after the complete elimination of the Syrian WMD arsenal, the most aggressive supporters for the use of force will push as hard as they can. The Syrian conflict is clearly entering a new phase of its development.

Alexander Orlov, political analyst, Orientalist expert, exclusively for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook.

Editing:  Jim W. Dean and Erica Wissinger

_______________________________

Jim W. Dean

Jim W. Dean was an active editor on VT from 2010-2022.  He was involved in operations, development, and writing, plus an active schedule of TV and radio interviews.

• Read Full Complete Bio >>>
• Jim W. Dean Archives 2009-2015