By: Tony Cartalucci
Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/05/301903/israels-unprovoked-attack-on-syria/
The US feigns disassociation with Hitlerian acts of Israeli
aggression - as was planned since 2007.
Unprovoked, Israel has attacked Syria numerous times over the past 2 days,
including attacks on the Syrian capital of Damascus, in what appears to be a
series of intentional provocations designed to drag the region into a wider
conflict its US sponsors can then enter militarily. Neither attacked directly
by Syria, nor able to cite credible evidence in regards to perceived threats
Israel claims to be reacting to, the assault on Syria represents a Chapter VII
breach of the United Nations Charter.
What’s more is that while the US feigns disassociation with Israel’s breach of
international peace, after jointly fueling a genocidal sectarian conflict
within Syria’s borders for the past two years, it is documented fact that the
US and Saudi Arabia planned to use Israel to conduct military attacks against
Iran and Syria, they themselves could not justify politically, legally, or
strategically.
What is now hoped is that Syria and Iran retaliate militarily, allowing the
“other shoe to drop,” and for the US, UK, France, and their regional axis to
directly intervene in Syria.
Insidious ploy engineered and documented in 2007-2009
As early as 2007, it was reported that a US-Saudi-Israeli conspiracy to
overthrow the governments of Iran and Syria by arming sectarian terrorists,
many linked directly to Al Qaeda, was already set in motion. Pulitzer
Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007
New Yorker article
“The
Redirection” stated:
“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.”
Of Israel and Saudi Arabia’s partnership it specifically stated:
“The policy shift has brought Saudi Arabia and Israel into a
new strategic embrace, largely because both countries see Iran as an
existential threat. They have been involved in direct talks, and the Saudis,
who believe that greater stability in Israel and Palestine will give Iran less
leverage in the region, have become more involved in Arab-Israeli
negotiations.”
Additionally, Saudi Arabian officials mentioned the careful balancing act their
nation must play in order to conceal its role in supporting US-Israeli ambitions
across the region. It was stated even then that using Israel to publicly carry
out attacks on Iran would be preferable to the US, which would ultimately
implicate the Saudis. It was stated:
“The Saudi said that, in his country’s view, it was taking a
political risk by joining the U.S. in challenging Iran: Bandar is already seen
in the Arab world as being too close to the Bush Administration. ‘We have two
nightmares,’ the former diplomat told me. ‘For Iran to acquire the bomb and for
the United States to attack Iran. I’d rather the Israelis bomb the Iranians, so
we can blame them. If America does it, we will be blamed.’”
This ploy was further developed in 2009 by the Fortune 500-funded (page 19)
Brookings Institution in their document,
“Which Path to Persia?” in
regards to Iran, and now clearly being utilized against Syria, the gambit was
described as follows:
“…it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian
provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly,
the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian
action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very
difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without
the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it.
(One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up
covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly,
or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of
Iranian aggression.)” - page 84-85,
Which Path to Persia?, Brookings
Institution.
And:
“Israel appears to have done extensive planning and practice for such a strike
already, and its aircraft are probably already based as close to Iran as
possible. As such, Israel might be able to launch the strike in a matter of
weeks or even days, depending on what weather and intelligence conditions it
felt it needed. Moreover, since Israel would have much less of a need (or even
interest) in securing regional support for the operation, Jerusalem probably
would feel less motivated to wait for an Iranian provocation before attacking.
In short, Israel could move very fast to implement this option if both Israeli
and American leaders wanted it to happen.
However, as noted in the previous chapter, the airstrikes themselves are really
just the start of this policy. Again, the Iranians would doubtless rebuild
their nuclear sites. They would probably retaliate against Israel, and they might
retaliate against the United States, too (which might create a pretext for
American airstrikes or even an invasion).” - page 91,
Which Path to Persia?,
Brookings Institution.
And Israel not waiting for a plausible justification to attack Syria is exactly
what has just happened. It should also be noted in particular, the last
paragraph which gives insight into what the US-led axis plans to do after this
egregious international crime - that is - to incrementally engulf the region
into a conflict it finally can justify its own entry into open military
aggression.
What should Syria and its allies do?
Syria, Iran, Russia and other nations that support the besieged nation most
certainly were aware of the Brookings document
Which Path to Persia? and
familiar with this strategy. It would be hoped that anything of value that the
Israelis would seek to attack in order to provoke a much desired retaliation
and subsequent war, would have been provided additional protection, or moved
entirely out of range of potential Israeli attacks.
A media campaign to illustrate the hypocritical and very revealing convergence
between Al Qaeda (the so-called Free Syrian Army or FSA) and Israeli interests
would undermine whatever remaining support the battered and failing Western-backed
terror campaign inside Syria may still have.
Additionally, Israel’s selection by the US to carry out this attack was done
specifically because Israel has long ago exhausted its international
legitimacy. What it is doing in Syria is a blatant international crime, in
direct violation of international law. Currently, Syria and its allies hold the
moral high ground against an enemy who is no longer fooling the world. If it is
calculated that Syria can survive Israel’s unprovoked brutality, it would be best
to do little or nothing, and incur internationally the same outrage that
accompanies Israel’s brutality against the Palestinians.
In light of the US using Israel as its proxy against Syria, should Syria and
its allies retaliate, it would be best to do so through any proxies they
themselves have at their disposal. Just as Hezbollah and the Palestinians now
routinely defeat Israel both strategically and politically, Syria now faces an
opportunity to do so again, only on a much bigger scale.
The outrageous actions of Israel, the despicable double-game the US attempts to
play by feigning disassociation with its regional beachhead in Tel Aviv, and
the silent complicity of the UN, has people around the world desperately
seeking retaliation from Syria, or Iran, or both. In reality, this is precisely
what the West hopes to achieve - a wider conventional war in which they hold
the advantage. By refusing to retaliate directly, Syria cripples the West
politically, highlighting the unprovoked nature of their attacks on a nation
they claim is a threat, yet fails to strike back even when its capital is under
bombardment. By responding through its own plausibly deniable proxies, tactical
and political pressure can be put on Israel to end its aggression.
It appears that the Western-backed terrorist front in Syria has been dealt a
fatal blow and is in the process of complete collapse. The attack by Israel is
a sign of desperation, seeking to expand a conflict that is about to end. Syria
and its allies face difficult decisions and dangerous desperation in the coming
days and weeks - with an axis of rogue states committing increasingly heinous
atrocities in search of a response
.
--------------
About: Tony Cartalucci
Tony Cartalucci is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher
and writer. He has been published on many alternative media websites, including
Alternative Thai News Network and LocalOrg. His writings deal with world events
from a Southeast Asian perspective as well as promoting self-sufficiency as one
of the keys to true freedom. His website is Land Destroyer Report
-
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.ca/
Posts
a.jpg)
a.jpg)
