Is
North Korea a Diversion for a US-Jordan Invasion of Syria?
Mike
Whitney
3
May, 2017
“Syrian
President Bashar Al-Assad said that his country has information that
Jordan is planning to send its troops into southern Syria in
cooperation with the United States….’Jordan is not an independent
country. Whatever the United States wants, it will happen,’ said
Assad.”
—
Middle East Monitor
“In
the event of a de-facto partition of Syria, the US and its allies
will get a strategically important region. It is through Deir Ezzor
that the proposed gas pipeline from Qatar is supposed to run….The
Deir Ezzor province is also home to Syria’s largest oil deposit,
the Al-Omar. …the city and the province are of particular value
since the deposits there contain the highly valuable light sweet
crude usable in the production of gasoline and diesel fuel.”
—
South Front, “The
Stronghold of Deir Ezzor; What You Need to Know”
The
United States is not going to launch a preemptive attack on North
Korea. The risks far outweigh the rewards and, besides, the US has
no intention of getting bogged down in a conflict that doesn’t
advance its geopolitical objectives. The saber-rattling is just an
attempt to divert attention from the Syria-Jordan border where the US
and Jordan are massing troops and equipment for an invasion of Syria.
That’s what’s really going on. The Korean fiasco is a
smokescreen.
True,
the Trump administration is milking the situation for all its worth,
but that doesn’t mean that they want a war with the North. That’s
not it at all. Washington wants to deploy its controversial THAAD
anti-missile system to South Korea, but it needs a pretext to do so.
Hence, the ominous threat of an “unstable, nuclear-armed North
Korea”, that’s all the justification Washington needed to get its
new weapons system deployed. Mission Accomplished.
But
the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD) isn’t aimed
at North Korea, it’s aimed at China, and China knows it which is
why it has protested its deployment repeatedly. The US wants to
surround China and Russia with military bases and missile systems
that are integrated into its broader nuclear weapons system. These
lethal systems are a crucial part of Washington’s plan to pivot to
Asia and rule the world into the next century. Here’s the rundown
from Tass:
“Anti-missile
elements that are being deployed around the world are part of a very
dangerous global project aimed at securing US’ overall overwhelming
superiority to the prejudice of security interests of other
states….The US missile defense architecture is tilting the
strategic balance of forces in the area of offensive weapons and
creates more and more serious risks of global instability.” (“US
anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe violate INF Treaty”)
And
here’s how Russian President Vladimir Putin summed it up:
“The
US is developing an anti-missile defense system which”….when it
is operational… “there will be a moment in time when our entire
nuclear capability will be neutralized, which means that the entire
global balance of power will be overturned.. This means one of the
powers will have absolute security and be able to do whatever it
likes in regional conflicts. We’re talking about unrivaled power in
global conflicts. ..This system forces us to create weapons that can
nullify the system asymmetrically.” (Tass)
Is
missile defense something the American people should want?
Heck
no. Just think of the number of people that Uncle Sam has slaughtered
in the last 16 years. Now try to imagine if all the constraints on
Washington’s rampaging were removed allowing the US to conduct its
bloody war on the world with complete impunity?
No
one in their right mind would ever give the Washington crazies that
kind of power. It’s a prescription for global annihilation.
Besides, absolute security for one country means no security for
everyone else.
But
deploying the THAAD anti-missile system is just one part of
Washington’s North Korea swindle. The fear-mongering is also being
used to grease the wheels of the Military Industrial Complex (MIC).
Here’s the scoop from The Hill:
“Sen.
John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) push for a $7.5 billion fund to bulk up the
U.S. military’s capabilities in the Asia-Pacific is gaining
momentum as tensions with North Korea mount. The commander of U.S.
forces in the region threw his support behind the idea this week,
“This kind of money can help us bring together our allies and
partners,” said Patrick Cronin, senior director of the Asia-Pacific
Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. …The …
proposal has gained more visibility amid the intensifying concerns
over North Korea and its nuclear program.” (“McCain plan gains
momentum amid North Korea threats”, The Hill)
So
the MIC lackeys in Congress had already been pushing this latest
boondoggle, but they needed a trumped up crisis in North Korea to put
them over the finish line. Typically, the process is called
“creative advertising”, which means scaring the shit out of the
public so you can rip them off. Here’s more from the same article:
“I’d
like to thank Chairman McCain and this committee for proposing and
supporting the Asia-Pacific Stability Initiative,” Adm. Harry
Harris, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, said at Thursday’s
hearing. “This effort will reassure our regional partners and send
a strong signal to potential adversaries of our persistent commitment
to the region.”
The
weapons manufacturers love sugar-daddy McCain who’s always on-hand
with gobs of moolah.
Here’s
more: “We can thank North Korea for one thing in this,” said
Harry Kazianis, director of defense studies at the Center for the
National Interest”. “They’re amplifying the imbalance in the
Asia-Pacific.” (The Hill)
Good
idea, let’s thank North Korea for this latest windfall for the
weapons makers. Why not? Let’s send Kim a nice big valentine from
the American taxpayer with John McCain’s name writ large at the
bottom.
In
any event, Washington’s policy towards North Korea hasn’t
changed. All the chest thumping and fireworks are just part of a
circus sideshow designed to justify additional defense splurging and
missile deployment. At the same time, the media is trying to divert
attention from critical developments in the Middle East, particularly
the Syria-Jordan border where Washington has rallied its
proxy-fighters into a makeshift army that will (likely) invade
southern Syria, charge northward to Deir Ezzor, establish a no-fly
zone over the occupied territory, and partition the area east of the
Euphrates preventing loyalist forces from reestablishing Syria’s
sovereign borders. That appears to be the basic game-plan. Check this
out from the Middle East Monitor:
“The
Syrian regime of President Bashar Al-Assad said that his country has
information that Jordan is planning to send its troops into southern
Syria in cooperation with the United States…
“We
have this information, not only from mass media, but from different
sources”…
Speaking
to The Washington Post, King Abdullah of Jordan reiterated that a
planned joint operation could take place against terrorists. “It is
a challenge, but we are ready to face it in cooperation with the US
and Britain.” (“Assad accuses Jordan of planning Syria invasion”,
Middle East Monitor)
The
pretext for the invasion will be to fight ISIS, but the real goal is
to seize the eastern part of the country consistent with a plan that
was concocted by the Brookings Institute two years ago. After 6 years
of covert support for CIA-backed militants on the ground, the Trump
administration appears to be leaning towards a more traditional
military approach. Here’s more from the LA Times:
“Reports
have also emerged of Jordanian and U.S. troops on the section of the
Jordanian border opposite southwest Syria, a possible prelude to a
campaign in which rebels, supported by Jordanian and coalition forces
on the ground, would overrun Islamic State’s pocket in the Yarmouk
basin, near southwestern Syria’s borders with Israel and Jordan.”
(“How long can Jordan keep walking the Middle East tightrope?”,
LA Times)
Naturally,
Moscow is concerned about the developments on the Jordanian border.
Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued a statement
saying, “We will pay special attention to the issues most important
for us which concern the situation on the Jordan-Syria border.”
Also
worrisome, is the fact that US Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog”
Mattis has been traveling across the Middle East rallying
Washington’s allies in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel. Mattis sees
the fighting in Syria as a proxy-war between the US and Iran for
influence in the region. This same erroneous view is shared by all of
the main powerbrokers in the Trump administration.
“Everywhere
there’s trouble in the region, you find Iran,” Mr. Mattis said on
a stop in Riyadh, adding that nations in the region are working to
“checkmate Iran and the amount of disruption, the amount of
instability they cause.”
These
latest developments take place just days before the resumption of
negotiations in Astana, Kazakhstan (May 3 and 4). Russia, Turkey,
Iran and a number of the leaders from the rebel groups will gather to
see if they can agree on the terms of a ceasefire and an eventual
settlement to the 6 year-long war. The Trump administration’s
cruise missile attack on a Syrian airbase in early April has boosted
the morale of many of the jihadists militias and is keeping them away
from the bargaining table. In other words, Trump’s unexpected
escalation has sabotaged Putin’s efforts to resolve the crisis and
end the hostilities. The last thing Washington wants in Syria is
peace.
A
number of reports have confirmed that Trump has handed control of his
foreign policy to his Generals, Mattis and McMaster. And while Mattis
has shown little interest in getting more deeply involved in the
Syrian conflict, McMaster sees Russia as a “hostile revisionist
power” that “intimidates our allies, develops nuclear weapons,
and uses proxies under the cover of modernized conventional
militaries.”
McMaster
is a hard-boiled militarist with a driving animus towards Russia. In
a speech he delivered at The Center for Strategic and International
Studies, McMaster offered this remedy for so called ‘Russian
aggression’. He said: “what is required to deter a strong nation
that is waging limited war for limited objectives… is forward
deterrence, …(is) convincing your enemy that (he) is unable to
accomplish his objectives at a reasonable cost.”
McMaster
can be expected to use his “forward deterrence” theory in Syria
by trying to lure Putin into a confrontation with US forces east of
the Euphrates. But there’s no reason to think that Putin will
fall into the trap, in fact, it seems highly unlikely given the
potential for a catastrophic face-off between the two nuclear-armed
superpowers. Instead, Putin will probably take the high-road, present
his case to the UN Security Council, and denounce the US
intervention as another example of Washington’s destabilizing and
expansionistic foreign policy.
Putin’s
worst mistake would be to base his strategy entirely on the situation
on the battlefield. He doesn’t need to liberate every inch of
Syrian soil to win the war. Let the US and its proxies seize the
territory, establish their military bases and no-fly zones, throw up
a DMZ along the Euphrates, and wade deeper into the Syrian morass.
Putin has other fish to fry. He needs to focus on winning hearts and
minds, strengthening alliances and building a broader coalition. He
needs to look like the only adult in the room, the rational leader
whose sole ambition is to end the dispute and restore security. He
needs to establish a contrast between his behavior and that of his
recklessly-violent and mentally-unstable rival, Washington, whose
flagrant disregard for international law and civilian lives has
plunged the Middle East and Central Asia into chaos and carnage.
If
Putin’s ultimate goal is to rebuild the system of global security
based on the bedrock principles of national sovereignty and greater
representation for all the countries in the world, he must lead by
example. Restraint and maturity in Syria will move him closer to that
goal.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.