Recent strikes on Syria by Israel have been alleged to be part of a regional plan by the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel to establish a no-fly-zone (NFZ) over Syria, just as NATO did in Libya in 2011 effectively handing the entire nation over to Al Qaeda and now “Islamic State” terrorists. DEBKA File has suggested in its article, “Israel air strikes wiped out Russian hardware for thwarting US no-fly zone plan over Syria,” that:
High-ranking American military sources revealed Monday, Dec. 8, that Israel’s air strikes near Damascus the day before wiped out newly-arrived Russian hardware including missiles that were dispatched post haste to help Syria and Hizballah frustrate a US plan for a no-fly zone over northern Syria.
Regardless of the veracity of this report, attempts to justify and impose a NFZ over Syria has been a stated goal of Western policymakers since 2011 when a similar ploy was used under the guise of “humanitarian intervention” in Libya.
No-Fly-Zone to Protect Terrorist Mercenaries, Not “Civilians” or “Rebels”
Syria is not Libya. Bashar Assad’s troops are well armed, and his ground forces are waging successful campaigns against rebel forces across the country. But eliminating Assad’s ability to take to the air and tilting the balance of power in favor of anti-Assad rebels—as the United States and its allies did with the fighters who eventually overthrew Moammar Gadhafi—is both achievable and advisable.
However, in Libya, NATO’s “humanitarian” NFZ clearly was implemented not to protect innocent civilians, but to provide air cover for terrorist mercenaries armed and directed by NATO itself. These terrorists are now revealed to be Al Qaeda and the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS). It is clear then that “Assad’s slaughter” is in all actuality a war being waged upon the depraved ranks of Al Qaeda – from its Al Nusra front to ISIS.
From the beginning of Syria’s conflict in 2011, the US State Department itself revealed Al Qaeda’s Al Nusra Front was not only involved in early fighting, but had already established a nationwide presence carrying out hundreds of attacks in every major Syrian city. In an official statement by the US State Department designating Al Nusra as a foreign terrorist organization and as an alias for Al Qaeda in Iraq, it was reported that:
Since November 2011, al-Nusrah Front has claimed nearly 600 attacks – ranging from more than 40 suicide attacks to small arms and improvised explosive device operations – in major city centers including Damascus, Aleppo, Hamah, Dara, Homs, Idlib, and Dayr al-Zawr. During these attacks numerous innocent Syrians have been killed.
Grad rockets fired indiscriminately into populated areas by Kiev regime – a war crime NATO has condemned before, but only when politically convenient.
“The Grad rocket cannot be targeted, so shooting it into a town full of civilians, with no specific military objective, violates the laws of war.” These words were found in a 2011 Human Rights Watch (HRW) document titled, “Libya: Rocket Attacks on Western Mountain Towns – Grads Striking Civilian Areas,” one of many reports ceaselessly cited by the United Nations and in turn, NATO as part of justifying a military intervention in the North African nation.
At the time, accusations of indiscriminate bombardment of populated areas by air and artillery, and the use of punitive squads to detain, beat, torture, and/or arbitrary arrest citizens served as the rhetorical and legal foundation of NATO’s “humanitarian war.”
Deploring the gross and systematic violation of human rights, including the repression of peaceful demonstrators, expressing deep concern at the deaths of civilians, and rejecting unequivocally the incitement to hostility and violence against the civilian population made from the highest level of the Libyan government.
Stressing the need to hold to account those responsible for attacks, including by forces under their control, on civilians.
Yet even in 2011, after NATO succeeded in passing its resolutions, it itself promptly violated them both by arming terrorists and targeting the Libyan government in what was clearly not the mere implementation of a “no-fly-zone” but rather a proxy war waged by NATO in the air and its terrorist forces on the ground fought to carry out regime change in favor of Western interests. So flagrantly did the West abuse the cause of human rights to advance its own insidious political agenda that it permanently undermined the West’s ability to again cite “human rights” to likewise invade and overthrow the government of Syria next.
(Tony Cartalucci – LD) – When faced on the battlefield with a numerically superior enemy, one must attempt to divide his enemy into smaller, more easily dispatched opponents, or even more ideally, divide them against one another, and have them defeat each other without ever drawing your sword. For Wall Street’s 0.1%, divide and conquer is a way of life.
Divide and Conquer
Never in human history has there been a more effective way for tyrants to rule over large groups of people who, should they ever learn to cooperate, would easily throw off such tyranny.
At the conclusion of the Anglo-Zulu War, the British despoiled Zululand, divided it into 14 separate cheifdoms, each led by a proxy obedient to the British Empire. The British ensured that these 14 cheifdoms harbored animosities toward one another and fostered petty infighting between them to ensure British interests would never again be challenged by a unified Zulu threat. Before the British, the Romans would employ similar tactics across Germania and Gual.
In this way, the British Empire and the Romans managed to not only decimate their enemies, but by keeping them perpetually infighting, divided, and at war with one another, manged to keep them subservient to imperial rule for generations.
As I’ve documented many times before, terrorists in Xinjiang province are openly and extensively funded and backed by the US – so says an ENTIRE page dedicated to NED’s support to that province alone on their official website – a fact Qatari propaganda outfit Al Jazeera conveniently leaves out of its report.
This is part of a greater campaign of US-backed subversion which includes the “Occupy Central” mobs petering out in Hong Kong.
(Tony Cartalucci – LD) – With Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” fully exposed as US-backed sedition, readers should be aware that this latest turmoil is but one part of a greater ongoing campaign by the United States to contain and co-opt the nation of China.
As early as the Vietnam War, with the so-called “Pentagon Papers” released in 1969, it was revealed that the conflict was simply one part of a greater strategy aimed at containing and controlling China.
“…the February decision to bomb North Vietnam and the July approval of Phase I deployments make sense only if they are in support of a long-run United States policy to contain China.”
It also claims:
“China—like Germany in 1917, like Germany in the West and Japan in the East in the late 30′s, and like the USSR in 1947—looms as a major power threatening to undercut our importance and effectiveness in the world and, more remotely but more menacingly, to organize all of Asia against us.”
Finally, it outlines the immense regional theater the US was engaged in against China at the time by stating:
“there are three fronts to a long-run effort to contain China (realizing that the USSR “contains” China on the north and northwest): (a) the Japan-Korea front; (b) the India-Pakistan front; and (c) the Southeast Asia front.”
While the US would ultimately lose the Vietnam War and any chance of using the Vietnamese as a proxy force against Beijing, the long war against Beijing would continue elsewhere.
This containment strategy would be updated and detailed in the 2006 Strategic Studies Institute report “String of Pearls: Meeting the Challenge of China’s Rising Power across the Asian Littoral”where it outlines China’s efforts to secure its oil lifeline from the Middle East to its shores in the South China Sea as well as means by which the US can maintain American hegemony throughout the Indian and Pacific Ocean. The premise is that, should Western foreign policy fail to entice China into participating in Wall Street and London’s “international system” as responsible stakeholders, an increasingly confrontational posture must be taken to contain the rising nation.
This proxy war has manifested itself in the form of the so-called “Arab Spring” where Chinese interests have suffered in nations like Libya that have been reduced to chaos by US-backed subversion and even direct military intervention. Sudan also serves as a proxy battleground where the West is using chaos to push Chinese interests off the continent of Africa.
Within China itself, the US wields terrorism as a means to destabilize and divide Chinese society in an attempt to make the vast territory of China ungovernable. In the nation’s western province of Xinjiang,the United States fully backs violent separatists.
Indeed, first and foremost in backing the Xinjiang Uyghur separatists is the United States through the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy (NED). For China, the Western region referred to as “Xinjiang/East Turkistan” has its own webpage on NED’s site covering the various fronts funded by the US which include:
International Uyghur Human Rights and Democracy Foundation$187,918
To advance the human rights of ethnic Uyghur women and children. The Foundation will maintain an English- and Uyghur-language website and advocate on the human rights situation of Uyghur women and children.
International Uyghur PEN Club $45,000
To promote freedom of expression for Uyghurs. The International Uyghur PEN Club will maintain a website providing information about banned writings and the work and status of persecuted poets, historians, journalists, and others. Uyghur PEN will also conduct international advocacy campaigns on behalf of imprisoned writers.
Uyghur American Association $280,000
To raise awareness of Uyghur human rights issues. UAA’s Uyghur Human Rights Project will research, document, and bring to international attention, independent and accurate information about human rights violations affecting the Turkic populations of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.
World Uyghur Congress $185,000
To enhance the ability of Uyghur prodemocracy groups and leaders to implement effective human rights and democracy campaigns. The World Uyghur Congress will organize a conference for pro-democracy Uyghur groups and leaders on interethnic issues and conduct advocacy work on Uyghur human rights.
It should be noted that the above list was taken from NED’s website in March 2014 – since then, NED has deleted several organizations from the list, as it has done previously regarding its support in other nations ahead of intensified campaigns of destabilization it wished to cover up its role in.
All of these NED-funded organizations openly advocate separatism from China, not even recognizing China’s authority over the region to begin with – referring to it instead as “Chinese occupation.”
World Uyghur Congress spokesman Dilxat Raxit said in an emailed statement that there was “no justification for attacks on civilians” but added that discriminatory and repressive policies provoked “extreme measures” in response.
From full-blown proxy wars in the 1960’s spanning Southeast Asia, to the US-engineered “Arab Spring” in 2011, to terrorism in Xinjiang and turmoil in Hong Kong today – what is taking place is not a battle for “democracy” or “freedom of expression,” but an existential battle for China’s sovereignty. For whatever problems the Chinese people have with their government, it is their problem and theirs alone to solve in their own way. Using the promotion of “democracy” as cover, the US would continue its attempts to infect China with US-backed institutions and policies, subvert, co-opt, or overthrow the political order in Beijing, and establish upon its ashes its own neo-colonial order serving solely Wall Street and Washington’s interests – not those of the Chinese people.
For the mobs of “Occupy Central,” many have good intentions, but the leadership is knowingly in league with foreign interests seeking to subvert, divide, and destroy the Chinese people – not unlike what China had suffered at the hands of European powers in the 1800’s to early 1900’s.
November 28, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci -LD) Germany’s international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) published a video report of immense implications – possibly the first national broadcaster in the West to admit that the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) is supplied not by “black market oil” or “hostage ransoms” but billions of dollars worth of supplies carried into Syria across NATO member Turkey’s borders via hundreds of trucks a day.
The report titled, “‘IS’ supply channels through Turkey,” confirms what has been reported by geopolitical analysts since at least as early as 2011 – that NATO member Turkey has allowed a torrent in supplies, fighters, and weapons to cross its borders unopposed to resupply ISIS positions inside of Syria.
In one surreal scene from the DW report, anti-Syria terrorists are seen walking across the border and literally shot dead just on the other side by Kurdish fighters.
Local residents and merchants interviewed by Germany’s DW admitted that commerce with Syria benefiting them had ended since the conflict began and that the supplies trucks carry as they stream across the border originates from “western Turkey.” The DW report does not elaborate on what “western Turkey” means, but it most likely refers to Ankara, various ports used by NATO, and of course NATO’s Incirlik Air Base.
US policy paper reveals desire for construction of full-scale extraterritorial army to invade Syria. Such an army is being built in Iraq and Turkey and it’s called “ISIS.”
November 10, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – The corporate-financier funded and directed policy think tank, the Brookings Institution, has served as one of several prominent forums documenting and disseminating US foreign policy. It would host in part the architects of the so-called “surge” during the nearly decade-spanning US occupation of Iraq, as well as battle plans for waging a covert war against Iran now well under way.
Part of this covert war against Iran involved the arming and backing of listed terrorist groups, and in particular, the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) which has killed US servicemen, American civilians, as well as countless innocent Iranians over the decades. Among those signing their name to this plan found within Brookings’ “Which Path to Persia?” report, was Kenneth Pollack. Now, in efforts to overthrow the government of Syria, also a stated and integral part of undermining, isolating, and destroying Iran, Pollack has revealed another element of the plan – to create a full-scale proxy military force outside of Syria, then subsequently invading and occupying Syria with it.
In the report titled, “Building a Better Syrian Opposition Army: How and Why,” Pollack cites the so-called “Islamic State” or “ISIS” as the ultimate impetus for expanded US intervention. However, upon looking at Pollack’s proposal, it merely looks as if the US is using ISIS as a pretext to more overtly intervene in order to overthrow the government of Syria – not in fact neutralize ISIS.
The Western media is now throwing its full weight behind the Hong Kong “Occupy Central” protests – they’ve been featured on at least 2 of the US State Department’s TIME Magazine covers and stories like NYT’s “Stars Backing Hong Kong Protests Pay Price on Mainland” attempt to appeal to the most base emotions …
And it is not Beijing simply squashing these people. No one is hiring these “stars” now involved in the fake protests in Hong Kong. Ironically, all these protesters bleat about is “freedom to choose,” well businesses and labels are “choosing” to boycott people involved in the protests – and here we see the hypocrisy and fraud behind the protests – yet again.
It’s about choosing what the protesters want, not choosing what everyone genuinely wants. And of course what the protesters want is clearly what the US State Department wants – elections their well funded and backed fraudulent proxies can run in and win before carrying out US foreign policy aimed at dividing and destroying China.