As the Syrian crisis enters its sixth year, the Donald Trump administration is looking more and more like the Obama administration every day.

As the Syrian crisis enters its sixth year, the Donald Trump administration is looking more and more like the Obama administration every day. With the Trump regime refusing to open useful dialogue with Russia regarding Syria, its obvious anti-Iran and pro-Israel positioning, and support for a very questionable “safe zone” plan for Syria, the odds of a rational U.S. policy in regards to Syria has lower and lower odds of existence as time progresses.

Yet, despite the fact that the Trump administration is apparently poised to continue the Obama regime’s proxy war of aggression against the people of Syria, an example of seamless transition, it should also be remembered that the plan to destroy Syria did not begin with Obama but with the Bush administration.

Even now, as the world awaits the continuation of the Syrian war through a Democratic and Republican administration, the genesis of that war goes back to the Republican Bush administration, demonstrating that there is indeed an overarching agenda and an overarching infrastructure of an oligarchical deep state intent on moving forward regardless of which party is seemingly in power.


As journalist Seymour Hersh wrote in his article, “The Redirection,”

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 cooperated 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.

“Extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam” who are “hostile to America and sympathetic to al-Qaeda” are the definition of the so-called “rebels” turned loose on Syria in 2011. Likewise, the fact that both Iran and Hezbollah, who are natural enemies of al-Qaeda and such radical Sunni groups, are involved in the battle against ISIS and other related terrorist organizations in Syria proves the accuracy of the article on another level.

Hersh also wrote,

The new American policy, in its broad outlines, has been discussed publicly. In testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that there is “a new strategic alignment in the Middle East,” separating “reformers” and “extremists”; she pointed to the Sunni states as centers of moderation, and said that Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah were “on the other side of that divide.” (Syria’s Sunni majority is dominated by the Alawi sect.) Iran and Syria, she said, “have made their choice and their choice is to destabilize.”

Some of the core tactics of the redirection are not public, however. The clandestine operations have been kept secret, in some cases, by leaving the execution or the funding to the Saudis, or by finding other ways to work around the normal congressional appropriations process, current and former officials close to the Administration said.

. . . . . .

This time, the U.S. government consultant told me, Bandar and other Saudis have assured the White House that “they will keep a very close eye on the religious fundamentalists. Their message to us was ‘We’ve created this movement, and we can control it.’ It’s not that we don’t want the Salafis to throw bombs; it’s who they throw them at—Hezbollah, Moqtada al-Sadr, Iran, and at the Syrians, if they continue to work with Hezbollah and Iran.”

. . . . . .

Fourth, the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure on the Assad government will make it more conciliatory and open to negotiations. Syria is a major conduit of arms to Hezbollah.

ALSO READ  ISIL's mass retreat continues as Syrian Army troops liberate 3 hills south of Palmyra

In January, after an outburst of street violence in Beirut involving supporters of both the Siniora government and Hezbollah, Prince Bandar flew to Tehran to discuss the political impasse in Lebanon and to meet with Ali Larijani, the Iranians’ negotiator on nuclear issues. According to a Middle Eastern ambassador, Bandar’s mission—which the ambassador said was endorsed by the White House—also aimed “to create problems between the Iranians and Syria.” There had been tensions between the two countries about Syrian talks with Israel, and the Saudis’ goal was to encourage a breach. However, the ambassador said, “It did not work. Syria and Iran are not going to betray each other. Bandar’s approach is very unlikely to succeed.”
. . . . . .

The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, a branch of a radical Sunni movement founded in Egypt in 1928, engaged in more than a decade of violent opposition to the regime of Hafez Assad, Bashir’s father. In 1982, the Brotherhood took control of the city of Hama; Assad bombarded the city for a week, killing between six thousand and twenty thousand people. Membership in the Brotherhood is punishable by death in Syria. The Brotherhood is also an avowed enemy of the U.S. and of Israel. Nevertheless, Jumblatt said, “We told Cheney that the basic link between Iran and Lebanon is Syria—and to weaken Iran you need to open the door to effective Syrian opposition.”

. . . . .

There is evidence that the Administration’s redirection strategy has already benefitted the Brotherhood. The Syrian National Salvation Front is a coalition of opposition groups whose principal members are a faction led by Abdul Halim Khaddam, a former Syrian Vice-President who defected in 2005, and the Brotherhood. A former high-ranking C.I.A. officer told me, “The Americans have provided both political and financial support. The Saudis are taking the lead with financial support, but there is American involvement.” He said that Khaddam, who now lives in Paris, was getting money from Saudi Arabia, with the knowledge of the White House. (In 2005, a delegation of the Front’s members met with officials from the National Security Council, according to press reports.) A former White House official told me that the Saudis had provided members of the Front with travel documents.

Hersh also spoke with Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the Shi’ite Lebanese militia, Hezbollah. In relation to the Western strategy against Syria, he reported,

Nasrallah said he believed that America also wanted to bring about the partition of Lebanon and of Syria. In Syria, he said, the result would be to push the country “into chaos and internal battles like in Iraq.” In Lebanon, “There will be a Sunni state, an Alawi state, a Christian state, and a Druze state.” But, he said, “I do not know if there will be a Shiite state.” Nasrallah told me that he suspected that one aim of the Israeli bombing of Lebanon last summer was “the destruction of Shiite areas and the displacement of Shiites from Lebanon. The idea was to have the Shiites of Lebanon and Syria flee to southern Iraq,” which is dominated by Shiites. “I am not sure, but I smell this,” he told me.

Partition would leave Israel surrounded by “small tranquil states,” he said. “I can assure you that the Saudi kingdom will also be divided, and the issue will reach to North African states. There will be small ethnic and confessional states,” he said. “In other words, Israel will be the most important and the strongest state in a region that has been partitioned into ethnic and confessional states that are in agreement with each other. This is the new Middle East.”

Yet, while even the connections between the plans to destroy Syria and the Bush administration are generally unknown, what is even less well-known is the fact that there existed a plan to destroy Syria as far back as 1983.

Documents contained in the U.S. National Archives and drawn up by the CIA reveal a plan to destroy the Syrian government going back decades. One such document entitled, “Bringing Real Muscle To Bear In Syria,” written by CIA officer Graham Fuller, is particularly illuminating. In this document, Fuller wrote,

ALSO READ  VIDEO: Syrian forces overrun ISIS northeast of Palmyra

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.

Even as far back as 1983, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez Assad, was viewed as a gadfly to the plans of Western imperialists seeking to weaken both the Iraqis and the Iranians and extend hegemony over the Middle East and Persia. The document shows that Assad and hence Syria represented a resistance to Western imperialism, a threat to Israel, and that Assad himself was well aware of the game the United States, Israel, and other members of the Western imperialist coalition were trying to play against him. The report reads,

Syria continues to maintain a hammerlock on two key U.S. interests in the Middle East:

— Syrian refusal to withdraw its troops from Lebanon ensures Israeli occupation in the south;

— Syrian closure of the Iraqi pipeline has been a key factor in bringing Iraq to its financial knees, impelling it towards dangerous internationalization of the war in the Gulf

Diplomatic initiatives to date have had little effect on Assad who has so far correctly calculated the play of forces in the area and concluded that they are only weakly arrayed against him. If the U.S. is to rein in Syria’s spoiling role, it can only do so through exertion of real muscle which will pose a vital threat to Assad’s position and power.

The author then presents a plan that sounds eerily similar to those now being discussed publicly by Western and specifically American corporate-financier think tanks and private non-governmental organizations who unofficially craft American policy. Fuller writes,

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. Iraq, perceived to be increasingly desperate in the Gulf war, would undertake limited military (air) operations against Syria with the sole goal of opening the pipeline. Although opening war on a second front against Syria poses considerable risk to Iraq, Syria would also face a two-front war since it is already heavily engaged in the Bekaa, on the Golan and in maintaining control over a hostile and restive population inside Syria.

Israel would simultaneously raise tensions along Syria’s Lebanon front without actually going to war. Turkey, angered by Syrian support to Armenian terrorism, to Iraqi Kurds on Turkey’s Kurdish border areas and to Turkish terrorists operating out of northern Syria, has often considered launching unilateral military operations against terrorist camps in northern Syria. Virtually all Arab states would have sympathy for Iraq.

Faced with three belligerent fronts, Assad would probably be forced to abandon his policy of closure of the pipeline. Such a concession would relieve the economic pressure on Iraq, and perhaps force Iran to reconsider bringing the war to an end. It would be a sharpening blow to Syria’s prestige and could effect the equation of forces in Lebanon.

Thus, Fuller outlines that not only would Syria be forced to reopen the pipeline of interest at the time, but that it would be a regional shockwave effecting the makeup of forces in and around Lebanon, weakening the prestige of the Syrian state and, presumably, the psychological state of the Syrian President and the Syrian people, as well as a message to Iran.

The document continues,

Such a threat must be primarily military in nature. At present there are three relatively hostile elements around Syria’s borders: Israel, Iraq and Turkey. Consideration must be given to orchestrating a credible military threat against Syria in order to induce at least some moderate change in its policies.

ALSO READ  Syrian Army battles US-backed rebels along Jordanian border: video

This paper proposes serious examination of the use of all three states – acting independently – to exert the necessary threat. Use of any one state in isolation cannot create such a credible threat.

The strategy proposed here by the CIA is virtually identical to the one being discussed by deep state establishment think tanks like the Brookings Institution today. For instance, in the Brookings document “Middle East Memo #21: Saving Syria: Assessing Options For Regime Change,” it says,

Turkey’s participation would be vital for success, and Washington would have to encourage the Turks to play a more helpful role than they have so far. While Ankara has lost all patience with Damascus, it has taken few concrete steps that would increase the pressure on Asad (and thereby antagonize Tehran). Turkish policy toward the Syrian opposition has actually worked at cross-purposes with American efforts to foster a broad, unified national organization. With an eye to its own domestic Kurdish dilemmas, Ankara has frustrated efforts to integrate the Syrian Kurds into a broader opposition framework. In addition, it has overtly favored the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood over all other opposition groups. Washington must impress upon Turkey the need to be more accommodating of legitimate Kurdish political and cultural demands in a post-Asad Syria, and to be less insistent on the primacy of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Some voices in Washington and Jerusalem are exploring whether Israel could contribute to coercing Syrian elites to remove Asad. The Israelis have the region’s most formidable military, impressive intelligence services, and keen interests in Syria. In addition, Israel’s intelligence services have a strong knowledge of Syria, as well as assets within the Syrian regime that could be used to subvert the regime’s power base and press for Asad’s removal. 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. Advocates argue this additional pressure could tip the balance against Asad inside Syria, if other forces were aligned properly.

While Syria is not in conflict with Iraq today, after being destroyed by the United States in 2003, Western Iraq now houses the mysteriously-funded Islamic State on the border between Iraq and Syria.

That being said, this plan is not merely being discussed, it is being implemented as one can clearly see by the fact that Israel routinely launches airstrikes against the Syrian military, Turkey continues to funnel ISIS and related terrorists into Syria through its own territory, and ISIS continues to present itself as an Eastern front militarily. As a result, the “multi-front” war envisioned and written about by the CIA in 1983 and discussed by Brookings in 2012 has come to fruition and is in full swing today.

The trail of documentation and the manner in which the overarching agenda of world hegemony on the behalf of corporate-financier interests have continued apace regardless of party and seamlessly through Republican and Democrat administrations serves to prove that changing parties and personalities do nothing to stop the onslaught of imperialism, war, and destruction being waged across the world today and in earnest ever since 2001. Indeed, such changes only make adjustments to the appearance and presentation of a much larger Communo-Fascist system that is entrenching itself by the day.

Source: Activist Post.

Share this article:

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

If your comment is held for moderation, please just be patient, it will be published unless it falls into one of the two categories as mentioned above.


    • FBI???? FBI is US federal police!!!! What are they fucking doing into this!
      Gosh, it’s like those accusing NATO to be implied! Would NATO attack Syria, there would rapidly be no more Syria as there is no more Libya or Yugoslavia! NATO only acts on UNSC or EU behalf (never been summoned by UE) or if you attack a NATO state. It packs 70% of military power on Earth. If NATO goes after you, you’re fucked! And be aware that all NATO actions were vetted by both Russia and China even if they abstained to vote : at UNSC, a permanent member abstention = a YES vote. A NO means veto.
      Where is China help??? BTW, Saudi Arabia buy their ballistic missiles from China; LOL! China’s air force is way much bigger than the Russian one, China is richer than USA, where are they? EU air forces have kicked out WAY MUCH MORE terrorists than PLA!
      US don’t give a fuck as soon as there is chaos, their main way to make money is arms sales. as long as there are troubles and it’s not on their soil, they don’t give a fuck! During Iran-Iraq war, they armed both camps!
      The bad day has begun for Turkey the day Erdolf began to rule the country! The bad day for Israel would be if al-Julani or al-Baghdadi ended ruling the country! Hey, it’s not really their interest having Muslim Brotherhood puppets even worst than Hamas as neighbours! Mossad helped to remove Morsi in Egypt while Erdolf smuggled arms into Gaza! Be serious! MB are takfiri salafshit, they are the scum of Earth. Hassan al-Banna and Amin al-Husseini were allied with the Nazis, al-Husseini even actively participated the Shoah when he was Waffen SS general and he was Aratfat’s uncle!
      As unpleasing it may seem for your delusional mindset, Chauchan, you are fucking wrong!

  1. Now, how to fuck up this plan! Very easy!
    Lead behind the scene negotiations with Israel through Russia!
    Peace treaty with Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran and Give up Golan Heights claims which BTW are ridiculous, GH were part of Jewish-Palestine under the UK mandate and so not in Syria, then having Hezbo merged either in Lebanese and/or Syrian army. Israel wouldn’t refuse such a deal: quiet borders. In exchange, they help destroying M.Brotherhood/Qaeda/ISIS and now, absorb pseudo-palestinians into other countries which usually, they came from anyway.
    Accept any pipeline in on the condition they merge and they pay %, no matter if gas/oil come from Iran, Iraq, KSA, Qatar. BTW, Israel/Cyprus pipeline will connect to EU by Greece and will be linked to Jordan an Egypt, so fuck Ankara!
    By doing so, Israel has all its border secured, Shias/Alawis are much more open to Jews than Sunnis and the classic Israeli peripheral approach can resume stead having to deal with Wahhabi/Salafi countries which have more extreme visions that they now managed to export to the ex-secular Turkey. Actually, Israel could also help unlock the situation in Yemen and such an alliance would nonetheless help stability in the region but GCC would be surrounded and it’s clear that MB and their backers are definitively not sympathetic to Israel and BTW, to Europe, US, etc etc etc. Qatar is even one of the main backers of the takfiri groups that did shit into Central/Western Africa.
    Creating such a block with the Shia Crescent, Egypt, Jordan and Israel would really fuck up the Salafi/Wahhabi double-agenda which BTW is not at all the US interest : everybody knows that Saudi children are raised in the hate of the ‘kuffars’ and it includes Shias, Alawis as much as Jews or “crusaders”.
    It’s clear it be a serious U-turn for the Shia Crescent rhetoric, anyway, Assad Sr. was really near of already signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1994 and wthout Mossad arms trafficking, Iran would have felt to Saddam.
    Such move would simply make the divide’n’conquer dirty US politics without any purpose and would be a real win-win situation as much as for the Shia Crescent as for Israel, Egypt and Jordan.
    Moreover, Qaeda is now out of control for KSA at the point now M.Brotherhood is banned by the House of Saoud since they tried to assassinate members of royal family. They’re now only Qatar/Turkish proxies, proof is the infighting between Jaish-al-Islam and Nusra.
    Added to this, there is serious potential for EU support as, think about it, the real target for this US dirty foreign politics is more EU than the ME! If not, they wouldn’t be behind the coup in Ukraine with, plotting this, a Vickie Nuland saying to US ambassador : “Fuck the EU”. Moreover, EU has fucking enough of the shit Sunni extremists are doing…
    It’s clear that there may be some need of a little mindset change but just think about it : Israel is only a 30k km² entity with 8.6M inhabitants and 4.6M squatters on 6000km².
    If we consider Lebanon+Egypt+Syria+Iraq+Iran+Yemen+Jordan, the 4.6M squatters, AKA ‘Palestinian people’ can easily be absorbed : 3,380,980km², 272,505,231 population. Remember that the full Arab-League but Jordan revoked all their passports in 1964 in order to push them into a situation of forever struggle against Israel. They created the UNRWA, a specific refugee system, where instead of settling and children of refugees getting the local nationality, they inherit a refugee status from parents, BTW, even PLO in the territories they occupy in Israel, refuse to give their pseudo-citizenship to refugees! UNRWA pays $440/month per capita! A good portion of it is diverted into ‘Palestinian’ leaders pockets. This situation has been artificially created to help to maintain Jew hatred while there should be no troubles with Israel and their neighbouring states, so are the facts of reclaiming Golan Heights, Gaza or West Banks which were all illegaly occupied between 1948 and 1967. Saddat and king Hussein were wise and ended understanding the GCC bias, others didn’t.

    If we consider the population of GCC+Turkey couldn’t compete, moreover, GCC could be landlocked any day.
    This would be a pretty efficient geopolitical move to take, especially as the House of Saoud is very elastic and will rapidly understand that there is a much more serious lever upon them than any the US ever had, forcing them to definitively break with their ‘Game of Thrones’ unless they want end with all their oil blockaded, same for GCC.
    Actually, US simply replicate the old British imperialism, this is NOT the interest of the region to give in this game and it includes Israel which BTW, could even do without US military help, they could get Rafales from France for half the cost of F-35 for something much more efficient. US just began to help them in 1967 and their nuke power didn’t came from the US, they already buy their submarines from Germany, build their own missiles, tanks, rifles, AWACS, they even customised the Indian Sukhoi at a point where they’re now more powerful than F-15 and they already have very good relations with al-Sisi, Abdullah-II and Putin. It wasn’t far that Obongo’s behaviour led to an Israeli switch of alliance.

    In fact, the US+GCC moto is “divide’n’conquer”, doing this as a response would be “unite’n’defeat”! Israel is a very small state but also the main military power of the region. They simply couldn’t ignore and rebuke such a proposal, especially if the offer is sincere. After all, they’re not the problem in the region, the problem is Qatar+Turkey+KSA and the fact that USA exploits this for their own benefit, this exploitation also include the exploitation of Jew hatred, don’t be fooled by this.
    If people in the region have enough of all this shit, playing the card of Israel’s integration is the key and be sure that both Russia and EU will see their interest at supporting such a stabilisation as it’s also their very interest. It’d put serious pressure on Saudis, also forcing a U-turn, then we end with both Turkish+Qatari MB veerrrrryyyy isolated…

    Unfortunately, by reading many posts on AMN, I’m not sure that many are ready as there is still serious irrational views and stupid hatred but there is no other way to go unless they want to see blood uselessly spilled forever.