Saturday, August 6, 2016

Syria Might Survive

Update: 8/6/16 3:59 p.m. - Reports that Aleppo, last stronghold of the US-backed jihadists trying to overthrow the Syrian government, was falling have resulted in a mainstream media blitz of reports saying that no, it isn't, but which are contradicted by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the London based mostly neutral group that has many contacts in Syria and that the media quotes uncritically in most cases. Time will tell. Much of what the mainstream media says about Syria turns out not to be true, like the 2013 chemical attacks attributed to the government that almost led to a US invasion of Syria and turned out to have been done by the opposition.

Some of the best news to come around lately is that the US is losing its war on Syria. Fought primarily through radical Islamist jihadists, the war has entered an end game and might be over before Hillary Clinton takes office and can ramp that conflict up as she has promised repeatedly to do.

US proxy Islamic jihadists are starting to surrender in Allepo and that city, the main hub for US supplied jihadist supply routes, could be entirely under Syrian army control within days, says University of Sydney professor Tim Anderson, who writes in online Global Research:

"Aleppo is the final turning point in this conflict because, after the liberation of Homs, Qsayr and Palmyra, definitive reverses are destroying the morale of both the jihadists and their sponsors. Not even fanatics are keen to join in an obviously losing cause."

Global Research is a leftist Canadian publication written primarily by academics and disaffected Americans, such as former assistant treasury secretary Paul Roberts who see US foreign policy as far too imperialistic and misguided.

The US war on Syria has killed around 500,000 people, according to The Guardian, and is the primary cause of the massive "refugee problem" that has caused the rightward lurch in many European countries and led many to elect neo fascist leaders and played a part in the UK's "Brexit" vote. Clinton has called for a "no fly zone" in Syria, which means a much more direct US military involvement -- US pilots and crews dropping bombs and being subject to Syrian anti aircraft fire, for example.

Syria is the brainchild of Neocons like Clinton, whose aim has been to break up the Middle East into a series of small bantustans under US control or influence and toward that end wanted Syria's president Bashar Assad out and a more US compliant ruler in. Clinton's brutal Libya war, begun under her influence as secretary of state and designed to provide a staging ground for US led Syrian operations, was part of that strategy.

The main Necon goal, as outlined in the infamous "Project For A New American Century," is to preserve US world dominance, which has become increasingly difficult as the US declines as an economic power, by relying on the US military.

The US has declined as an economic power, of course, because of the declining purchasing power of US workers, whose living standards have been reduced by Neoliberalism -- Reaganomics -- the set of economic policies implemented by Democrats and Republicans alike. Opposition to those policies by the American working class has been the driving force behind the Bernie Sanders campaign and, less directly but nonetheless, the campaign of Donald Trump who opposes many key policies of Neoliberalism and of Neocon foreign policy and is therefore in many key aspects to the left of Hillary Clinton, but whose sometimes crude nativism has galvanized many in the US working class who were previously attracted to less overt Republican versions of it.

Note: Interestingly, Clinton's call for a "no fly zone" in Syria has disappeared from her campaign web site -- I noticed it last time I checked there about week ago -- and she now stresses diplomacy to end the conflict. Read this as a first step in establishing a narrative about the conflict that favors the US and recasts the US defeat as a victory -- see Anderson's comments on this in the article. Syria has no effect on the US election, nor does much of anything about US foreign policy. However such documents as campaign policy statements can provide ammunition at some point for Clinton opponents.

No comments:

Post a Comment