Yesterday on democracyNow a long time journalist/author was interviewed re Syria. He provided -at least to me- the most informed and cogent explanation of what is happening in the Middle East re Iran,the U.S., Russia. Israel et al.
The clarity the interview provided needs -IMNSHO- to be propagated so that’s what this diary is about.
“To discuss the situation in Syria, we’re joined by Patrick Seale, a leading British writer on the Middle East and author of “Asad: The Struggle for the Middle East.” “It’s at least a two- or possibly a three-stage crisis. Internally in Syria, the situation is getting worse by the day,” Seale says. “At a higher level, there is a struggle between the United States, on the one hand, and its allies, and its opponents like Russia and China… Then there’s a third level, possibly, of Arab Gulf states like Qatar, for example, even Saudi Arabia behind it, who are obsessed and worried by Iran, and they think that Iran might stir up Shia communities in the region.”
The ‘civil war’ internal to the two main divisions of Islam by the Saudi and Iranian governments is -afaic- a key factor that doesn’t get anywhere near the publicity it should.
“PATRICK SEALE: Well, it’s of great significance, and there’s a whiff of a new cold war about it. You see, Russia has decades-long interests in the Middle East, and particularly in Syria during the time of Bashar al-Assad’s father, during the Cold War, in fact. China is a leading customer for Iranian oil and very much objects to American sanctions and European sanctions on Iran’s oil exports. China is, of course, not overjoyed by American attempts to contain its influence in the Asia-Pacific region, which President Obama has spoken about a great deal. And so, these two powers, what are they saying by their vetoes? They’re saying they don’t accept American and Israeli hegemony over the Middle East. They say they have interests there, too, and they want their interests to be addressed and to be respected.”
And this is but a continuation and extension of the ‘Great Game‘. There’s a saying “what you sow, so shall you reap” and what the world is now reaping is the fruits of colonialism, poisonous as they are.
“Internally in Syria is a completely different struggle. Now, you see, the main element in the opposition, the main—the most powerful element in the Syrian National Council is the Muslim Brotherhood. Now, just the other day, they celebrated the 30-year anniversary of the assault on Hama by Hafez al-Assad, the father of the present president. And in that struggle, at least 10,000 people were killed in the city of Hama. Now, we have to understand the background of that. Hama in 1982 was the climax of a terrorist campaign by the Muslim Brothers, which began in the late ’70s, to overthrow the Assad regime at that time. And they seized control. The insurgents seized control of Hama, butchered Ba’ath Party members and officials, and it’s only at that stage that the regime moved in and crushed that insurgency and killed a lot of people, a lot of innocent people. Now, the specter of what happened then, 30 years ago, hangs over the present situation. And the Muslim Brothers, they’ve been outlawed for the last 30 years. They’ve suffered all sorts of problems at the hands of the regime. And they are thirsting for revenge. So that’s why I’m saying it’s “kill or be killed.” The present government feels that these are armed insurgents, and the mistake of the opposition was in fact to resort to arms. And as we heard a moment ago from, I think, a Syrian spokesman there, that any government, whatever its political coloring, will cease—will seem justified in putting down an armed insurrection in its territory.”
What I found missing from this interview was Iraq, which,thanks to the neo-cons, essentially was handed over to the Iranians via the takeover of governmental affairs by the Shi’ite population of Iraq. Which will rally in support of Iran given any attack on it.
“The truth is that terrible mistakes have been made on both sides in the Syrian conflict. The regime’s mistake was to resort to live fire right at the start, when the protesters were peaceful. And the opposition’s mistake has been to resort to weapons. And that has given the regime the justification it felt it needed to crush them. So, on both sides, there have been mistakes.”
And so a civil war has come about.
“Now, Saudi Arabia is the Arab world’s heavyweight. It is the great financial powerhouse. It doesn’t particularly like Iran. It thinks—sees Iran as a regional competitor. It’s frightened of Shia power, the fact that Shias have come to power in Iraq, as well. And so, it would rather like to contain Iran. However, there are some Saudis, some senior Saudis, who understand that Saudi Arabia and Iran are really partners. They share a responsibility for the security of the Gulf region, and they should start a security dialogue. That’s what they need to do, rather than being dragged in to this quarrel between the United States and Israel, on the one hand, and Russia and China, on the other.
And if the U.S. REALLY was interested in peace, then that rapprochement is what we should be encouraging; but our government isn’t really interested in peace as they are apparently too dumb to figure out how they could make money from such a situation.



22 Comments




More on the attempt by the U.S. to maintain a failing empire
“The United States and the Philippines will hold combat drills together to counter China’s rising influence in the area.”
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/02/201228133621867303.html
It is NO GAME to my Eurasian grandchildren in the Line of FIRE. It Is DEADLY.
Are you forgetting that both parties in a Great Game are attempting colonialism and hegemony? It sure sounds like it.
Russia and Iran are no more innocent defenders against colonialism than the U.S. would ever be with the current crop of jerks running the think tanks. And the internal situation in Syria is, as your Patrick Seale says, intolerable. Extremely reprehensible to be supplying arms into, just as it’s reprehensible to supply arms to Bahrain right now.
So don’t beatify Russia and China in all of this. They aren’t doing the world a favor. The Assad regime is conducting a siege against civilians in Homs. Sieges against civilians are just as much a crime against humanity in Homs, in 2012 as they were in Gaza, in 2009. It doesn’t matter whether Assad thinks he’s fighting the Muslim Brothers or little green men from Mars.
Keep your eye on the little ball. What matters is the civilian population and the displaced population. And preserving as much of the social infrastructure as possible while working to end the violence and bloodshed.
And for the Great Game? It will get solved only if, first among other things, the U.S. and Iran put their differences aside and work together for the good of the region and the world. Fat chance of that right now, but that’s what has to happen. Any country that interferes with that agenda (are you listening, Israel) is interfering with world peace. Because that doesn’t look particularly likely? The U.S. and Iran should both butt out of Syria until they’re prepared to act in the best interests of the world.
And Russia should stop supplying arms to a criminal.
If China needs something to do, it should butt the fuck out of The Sudan or forever hold its peace about interfering in the internal affairs of nations. Such a blood-for-oil imperialist hypocrite.
“Are you forgetting that both parties in a Great Game are attempting colonialism and hegemony? It sure sounds like it.”; no, I’m not but the current situation is directly traceable to the dis-solution of the Ottoman Empire after WW1.
And nothing I wrote is giving a pass to Russia and China; all Seale’s was pointing out was how the Saudi’s and Iranian governments need to resolve the difficulties instead of playing to the U.S. /Israeli hegemonic desires.
Yes and that’s why instead of calling for regime change in a U.N. resolution the U.S. should be insisting on ICC charges for crimes against humanity prosecutions in the resolution. Of course, the U.S. can’t do that because it isn’t a signatory to the ICC and that would also expose it’s clients in Bahrain,Yemen,etc. to such resolutions(besides the U.S. citizens guilty of such).
Thanks for short-handing some of it, ubetcha. I tuned in late, and only heard ten minutes or so of Seales’ take. The tpart about Iran and Saudi Arabia needing to work it out *was* really noteworthy. Can’t say it’s very realistic, since there are so many proxy battles going on now, so much fear, and so many desires to be in control of resources.
The Lennon was great. Thanks for that, too.
Crazy how little attention is given to the US and Saudi Arabia arming and supplying tanks to Bahrain, though, isn’t it?
Shoot; so many different standards…and averted eyes and hypocrisies.
1%ers fighting other 1%ers.
And every time, the 99 are used as their cannon fodder against other 99ers.
“our government isn’t really interested in peace as they are apparently too dumb to figure out how they could make money from such a situation.”
Ah yes, the horror that capitalism has become thanks to sociopaths. Nailed it.
Excuse me? There are Russian and Iranian hegemonic desires as well. That’s what I meant. You have, in fact, chosen sides if you believe all the hegemonic desires are on one side of the game — the U.S/Israeli side. Why is this so hard to see here at FDL?
Tanks to Bahrain, a great sin. Tanks to Syria? Oh, we can live with that and even supply articles about how the torture and death isn’t as bad as all that, right Wendy? Did you read my citation from MSF? Torture and stationing security forces at hospitals. Forced amputations of injured demonstrators. But don’t worry, we’ll raise a cry about mistreatment of Occupy protesters and all feel smug.
And a good one by Pepe Escobar – Syria Q&A :
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB09Ak02.html
Brendan O’Neill:
“Those who claim that Russia’s and China’s veto has held back the cause of democracy in Syria should have a serious word with themselves. Why on Earth would you expect a semi-democratic regime and an undemocratic regime to help deliver democracy in Syria, any more than you would expect Hague or Clinton and the other bombers of Iraq and Afghanistan to do so? It is for the people of Syria to get rid of Assad and to try to build a new nation, not authoritarians and idiots from the East or the West.”
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/12054/
and Justin Raimondo:
“There is no doubt, however, that the Western powers and their regional sock puppets are funding and arming the various militias that claim to be the “opposition,” with radical Islamists in the forefront. This campaign can succeed in keeping the Assad regime in a state of crisis and basically grinding the country down. The real danger – or opportunity, depending on one’s point of view – comes with the possibility of Iran allowing itself to be dragged into the fight.”
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2012/02/07/our-bloodstained-hands/
My life, and those of others here, would be much easier if we were as self-righteously confident as you ondelette, that we absolutely knew what you claim to *Know* with a capital K. You constantly tell us that your sources are impeccable, that we are apologists for Russia unless we accept the narrative you and most all others do, and did in Libya. You believe that every organization like the UNCHR and the MSF always just lay out the facts, and we aren’t ever to bring other more nuanced concerns or opinions into the discussion.
I did scan the report you left, and I may read it more thoroughly today with less sleepy eyes, but it was you, was it not, who also advised that the Arab League monitors’ report would shed vast new proof about that would coincide with your absolutist take on the situation. And yet it wasn’t all that clear, was it, or at least what I’ve read from others who’ve claimed to have read it? I’d like to hear more; no matter how difficult it is to find anything like the truth, I think we need to work toward it.
Shoot, even the NYT says it’s not clear who set the bombs that went off before the monitors arrived; we shouldn’t also have questions?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/25/world/middleeast/allegations-traded-after-attack-in-syrian-capital.html?_r=1
And what? You think it’s unfair or naïve to wonder about double standards when all these proxy-wars are being fought all over the ME? We should take at face value the prevailing opinion, because the West never jiggers with the truth to influence public opinion? The Arab League report was being discredited before it was even written; were the monitors’ communication equipment confiscated? Were they denied armored vehicles for travel to sites and document evidence? Is the truth of that verifiable? I sure dunno.
But when I remember that regime change in Syria was on the neo-con agenda, and is being followed by this administration, it makes me pretty edgy about taking either NATO’s or the GCCC’s word at face value. With a new Cold War with Russia ginning up, shouldn’t we ask if the West has been working on the inside to foment civil war, drive out Assad, and force the Russians to move their fleet out of Syria? Or is the simpler, Occam’s Razor right after all: that it’s all a true People’s Rebellion, and we should cheer on Clinton for calling for Assad’s removal as an altruistic, caring move? We probably shouldn’t ask where she was 6 months ago, or why she only chides Bahrain and Saudi Arabia enough to seem credible to…some observers.
Yep; you know easily a hundred, maybe a thousand times more than I do about all the players and the history and the global bodies’ reports that we’d all love to believe, ondelette. But given the history of the tissue of lies we’ve been treated to, shouldn’t we really be asking these questions? Are we too cynical now as we try to factor in other minority narratives that cause us to be less sanguine than you are that the dominant Assad narrative is the true one? It may be that you’re right, but your communication sure leaves a lot to be desired, frankly.
As to the link I posted, scanning it mainly made the case that what the monitors found numerically wasn’t what was being claimed in terms of dead, prisoners released, or still held captive…that was what I saw. Your bitterness causes you to make the leap that stating those facts is accepting of torment or barbarity; guess again. And your bottom line about Occupy and smugness is just…low. If anyone here is smug about all this, it’s you. Kinda too bad, too, because you seem to have some useful info, but you lob it at us like weapons.
In any event, it’s not likely I’ll engage with you further on this; but I will be interested to see how any of it plays out, as in Libya, and I wish that the killing stops on both sides, though it’s not likely for now. And I can’t say I like one whit how things are proceeding there; but then I do believe that NATO is building a giant base there, and that the oil workers aren’t locals, and that control of the production and delivery of their oil was the prize (leaving aside all the water issues I don’t understand).
I merely call your attention to your own changing standards. Do more than “scan” the report, which is from Doctors Without Borders. Do you have a problem with their methodology, or do you think they are some proxy of your precious conspiracies of NATO and Western Powers?
Read what is said. It is offered without comment, as interviews. As stated, MSF claimed only that the duplication of method and duplication of the claimed acts were the corroboration that they were going on. And I stated to you on the other column, they were further duplicated because more such evidence was in the PHR (Physicians for Human Rights) report. That report is here. They don’t have your problem with taking sides and pretending they’re antiwar, here’s their previous piece on doctors in Bahrain.
So rather than deliver a huge diatribe about my character and how smug or self-confident I am, or how careful and fact-checking you are, just read. You offer us DEBKA. Don’t bother. You are sifting through what you can find online looking for stuff to corroborate the point of view you would like to be true. But there is literature out there that is gathered that is much less twisted that says otherwise, it just doesn’t present some great overarching picture of Western involvement in a dark plot.
The killing needs to stop, but it isn’t likely to stop while the Russians supply arms to the government. The government is doing most of the killing. This isn’t Libya. Say that to yourself 100 times before going out to read, and maybe, just maybe, you’ll actually see Syria when you look shit up.
My point right now is that for all the people who yell here and yell at UT and yell elsewhere about hypocrisy endlessly: If you can’t condemn the torture and killing and maiming by the government of Syria now, you had better stop yelling about hypocrisy of others. The MSF report provides testimony of people who were peacefully protesting, who were injured, and who were forced-amputated at hospitals because of government security, or who were tortured. You are hypocrites if you side with that government, or with their supporters, the Russians and Iranians and ignore that. You must call for an end to that treatment or you do not believe in what you say you believe in.
And yes, wendydavis, I can be very self-confident that I can call for an end to such behavior, which is both a human rights violation, and if this becomes an armed conflict, a violation of international humanitarian law. I have no qualms about asking all parties in any situation such as this to cease any such behavior such as this. I don’t really care which side in what Great Game they are on. It doesn’t matter who’s building what bases or where in the world you think there’s a plot afoot.
Human rights violations are human rights violations, humanitarian law violations are humanitarian law violations, and crimes against humanity, like, for instance, sieges, are to be condemned. Not cheered because they are being run by someone who is opposed to Western Powers. Anyone who says otherwise is an advocate of a major criminal and a hypocrite.
Discounting UNHCHR, UNICEF, MSF, PHR, ICRC, SARC, HRW, and promoting Jason Raimondo and DEBKA as credible is ludicrous. Raimondo and Escobar went into this with a strategy of deliberately backing whatever the U.S. didn’t back on the strength of the idea that they wanted to pre-empt having to change sides like they had done on Libya. It wasn’t based on facts, it was based on an editorial piece on whether antiwar.com was losing its edginess. Ever see Navi Pillay base her opinions on such tripe?
I don’t believe I ever referenced Justin Raimondo, and as you are simply lying about my crediting Debkafile, since I clearly offered my opinion that they seem to be promote agitprop, I’ll leave you to it.
It’s scurrilous of you to paint me as not condemning the ‘torture and maiming being done by the Syrian government’ in my quest for some measure of truth. Believe me, I haven’t ‘gone searching for evidence to ballast my belief’ or whatever; most of my time has gone into researching for, and the writing of, and spending 2 long days for each answering comments…two major diaries on subjects totally unrelated to any of this. To say I’m behind on any new info would be one thing, but as to the other accusation: you are seriously on crack.
But you may glad of this (found it searching for further info on the Arab League monitors report). And note the tweet Rogin posted about Lieberman, McCain, and Graham; some help will be on the way.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/12/28/obama_administration_secretly_preparing_options_for_aiding_the_syrian_opposition
I’m not lying about you and DEBKA, I’m saying that’s the quality of the sources you reference, and it is.
I’m not supporting any aid by the administration to the Syrian opposition. You and the people like you on this site, are the people who support the Manichaean view that there are exactly two sides to all this. Which is what I just said. And why I brought out the position taken by Raimondo.
So instead of trying to paint me as a supporter of the administration’s position, which I did not support, look to your own support for any position which opposes them, which is what I’m really criticizing.
And if you ever get the intelligence to fathom the fact that just being against whatever the U.S. does isn’t enough to be a good person in this world, then you will have learned something.
The CIA and the US State Dept. have been covert actors in the “Arab Spring” for years. The CIA/State Dept. spooks have had this (Arab Spring) in the works going back to 2005-2006 when funding started to recruit “activists.” The Saudis and the other Arab states may be worried about Iran but they also don’t want to become the next victim of CIA/State Dept. trained “activists.” I tend to believe the smaller Arab states are more motivated by the latter than former. In the “Great Game” of the CIA/State Dept. Arab Spring scoreboard, one TD in Tunisia, one punt in Egypt, and one, at the least, within field goal range in Libya. With Syria’s proximity to Israel….there will be no punt on fourth down.
@ondelette February 9th, 2012 at 8:00 am
“I’m not supporting any aid by the administration to the Syrian opposition. You and the people like you on this site, are the people who support the Manichaean view that there are exactly two sides to all this.”
Not an operative theory of mine, in particular, but yes, I do tend to imagine the US at the core of much of this, since the ovverthrow of the Shah back in the day, and the increasing global hegemony we author while gathering despotic regimes as allies toward that end. And we are the nation who have known for decades that we could and should be creative alternative, sustainable power, but almost every administration works against that, so that in the name of securing oil and gas, the profiteers can: make war, increase Empire, topple duly-elected leader who are not US or Western allies ‘business friendly’, use the CIA and now JSOC to further those ends; use brinksmanship faux ‘foreign policy’ and faux ‘diplomacy’ to: sell weapons of war to despots in trade for access to oil, which never mind seldom works out, provide nuclear power for same, and now is turning toward the Pacific, which only means ‘making sure the BRIICs don’t get a piece of the resource pie, as in, for an example, AFRICOM aiming to shut China out from further control and gain.
Two sides? Yeppers; we’re sure at least ONE side causing all this. I think it wasn’t Russia that wanted the fight; I think we forced a lot of it, and China? They’d been willing to let us fight the wars, and quietly buy up all the oil, build the pipelines etc.
You ought to see the deal Pakistan may soon make to allow China to build bases there. Our FP didn’t work out too well there, either. Mebbe some alliance can encourage some reckoning over Kashmir.
You left out the Chinese and seem to miss my point in posting this entirely.
I will ask Santa if he’ll make me 1/3 as intelligent as you; srsly.
Self-confidence is one thing but when it leaps a line into accusations or mind reading tricks of knowing that someone’s stated position is fake or devolves into condescension… then that “self-confidence” becomes something else entirely. At that point most people will just quit caring what your thoughts are.
Wendy is a decent individual and I must say more patient with your pushy & condescending manner than I could be.
Be careful what you wish for Wendy… that impressive intelligence seems to bring with it some fairly heavy baggage.
Thanks for da warning, Feet; and for the support. ;o)
I told myself early this mornin’: Do Not Engage. Do NOT Engage. And yet…there I went; what a fookin’ idiot, proving his point, sadly, eh? LOL!