Syria

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:24 pm

what's left
The US-Led War on Yemen
Washington is hiding its leadership of the war on Yemen behind the Saudis

November 6, 2017

By Stephen Gowans

In October, 2016, two Reuters’ reporters published an exclusive, under the headline: “As Saudis bombed Yemen, U.S. worried about legal blowback.” [1]

The reporters, Warren Strobel and Jonathan Landay, revealed that legal experts at the US State Department had warned the White House that the United States could be charged with war crimes in connection with the Saudi Air Force bombing campaign in Yemen.

So far, the bombing campaign has left tens of thousands dead and many more wounded, as well as over 10 percent of Yemen’s population homeless. Accompanied by naval and aerial blockades, the aggression has created near famine conditions for somewhere between 25 to 40 percent of the population and has contributed to a cholera outbreak affecting hundreds of thousands.

According to Strobel and Landay, “State Department officials … were privately skeptical of the Saudi military’s ability to target Houthi militants without killing civilians and destroying ‘critical infrastructure’”. [2]

The officials acknowledged that the airstrikes were indiscriminate (a war crime), but said that the indiscriminate nature of the bombing was due to the inexperience of Saudi pilots and the difficulty of distinguishing enemy militants not wearing uniforms from the civilian population.

All the same, inasmuch as the bombing is indiscriminate, irrespective of why, it constitutes a war crime.

The second point the State Department lawyers made is that the United States is a co-belligerent in the war.

The Reuters article didn’t reveal the true extent to which the United States is involved, but it did acknowledge that Washington supplies the bombs which Saudi pilots drop on Yemen and that the United States Air Force refuels Saudi bombers in flight.

In other words, the United States plays a role in facilitating the campaign of indiscriminate bombing.

This was of great concern to the State Department legal staff.

The lawyers pointed out that while the indiscriminate bombing is the work of Saudi pilots, blame for the war crime could also be pinned on the United States through a legal instrument Washington had helped to create; hence, the fear of legal blowback.

The legal instrument was created by the UN-established Special Court on Sierra Leone, which the United States backed, if not instigated.

The court had ruled that Liberia’s president Charles Taylor was guilty of war crimes committed in the civil war in Sierra Leone, even though Taylor wasn’t in Sierra Leone when the crimes were committed. What’s more, Taylor, himself, had no direct connection to the crimes. This, everyone acknowledged.

But that, said the court, didn’t matter.

What mattered was that Taylor had provided “practical assistance, moral support and encouragement” to people in Sierra Leone who had committed war crimes.

Therefore, the court ruled, Taylor was guilty of war crimes, as well. [3]

The United States used the same legal instrument to indict Al Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo Bay for the crime of 9/11, even though the detainees in question had no direct involvement in the 9/11 attacks. It was sufficient that they had provided moral support and encouragement to those who had. [4]

This instrument, which had served Washington well in locking up people it didn’t like, now proved problematic, and the reason why is that the United States provides practical assistance, moral support and encouragement to the Saudis in a campaign of indiscriminate (hence, war criminal) bombing. US military personnel and state officials are therefore open to war crimes charges under a legal principle Washington helped to establish.

Worse, Washington offers the Saudis far more than just encouragement and moral support. It also furnishes its Arabian ally with diplomatic support, as well as the bombs that are dropped on Yemenis, and the war planes that drop the bombs. Additionally, it trains the pilots who fly the warplanes who drop the bombs.

And that’s not all. The United States also flies its own drones and reconnaissance aircraft over Yemen to gather intelligence to select targets for the Saudi pilots to drop bombs on. [5] It also provides warships to enforce a naval blockade. And significantly, it runs an operations center to coordinate the bombing campaign among the US satellites who are participating in it, including Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and Jordan—the kingdoms, emirates, sultanates and military dictatorships which make up the United States’ Arab allies, all anti-democratic.

In other words, not only is the United States providing encouragement and moral support to the Saudis—it’s actually running the war on Yemen. In the language of the military, the United States has command and control. The only thing it doesn’t do is provide the pilots to drop the bombs.

Here’s what the Wall Street Journal reported: A Pentagon spokesman said the United States has special operations forces on the ground and provides airborne intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, operational planning [my emphasis], maritime interdiction, security, medical support and aerial refueling. [6]

According to the newspaper, Pentagon war planners run a joint operations center where targets are selected for Saudi pilots to drop bombs on. [7]

When you run the operations center, you run the war.

So, two important aspects of the war: First, the bombing is indiscriminate and therefore a war crime—and Washington knows this. Second, the United States is involved in the war to a degree that is infrequently, if ever, recognized and acknowledged.

In fact, the war on Yemen is almost universally described as a Saudi-led war. This is a mischaracterization. It is a US-led war.

The war is consistent with the immediate aim of the United States in the Arab and Muslim worlds—to eliminate any organized, militant opposition to US domination of the Middle East. It is an aim that accounts for Washington’s opposition to entities as diverse as the Syrian government of Bashar al Assad, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, and Al Qaeda. While these states and organizations have differing agendas, their agendas overlap in one respect: all of them oppose US domination of the Arab and Muslim worlds.

There are two organizations in Yemen that militantly oppose US domination of Yemen specifically and the Muslim world broadly: Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and the Houthis. Both are Islamist organizations. Both are implacably opposed to US and Israeli interference in the Muslim world. And both are committed to freeing Yemen from US domination. But they have different approaches.

Al Qaeda directs its attacks at what it calls its distant and near enemies.

The distant enemy is the United States, the center of an empire which Zbigniew Brzezinski, a principal figure in the US foreign policy establishment, had called a hegemony of a new type with unprecedented global reach and scale—in other words, the largest empire in human history.

The near enemy, by contrast, according to Al Qaeda ideology, comprises the component parts of the US Empire—the local governments which are subordinate to the United States and do Washington’s bidding (Yemen under the previous government, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt, and so on.)

Al Qaeda carries out campaigns against both its distant and near enemies—which is to say, against Western targets on Western soil, and against local governments which collaborate with, and act as agents of, the United States.

The Houthis, in contrast, model themselves on Hezbollah and Hamas. They focus on what Al Qaeda calls the near enemy, that is, local governments which are extensions of US global power. Hezbollah focuses on Western interference in Lebanon, Hamas on the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and the Houthis on Western lieutenants in Yemen, but do not seek to strike Western targets on Western soil as Al Qaeda does.

+++

Before the Houthis took control of the government, Washington was waging a war in Yemen against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

Washington had deployed Special Operations Forces and the CIA to deal with an Al Qaeda branch in Yemen that had organized the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris and an attempted 2009 Christmas bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner.

But these Al Qaeda attacks were only a symptom of what the United States is waging a war on. The United States says it’s waging a war on terrorism but what it’s actually waging a war on are the forces that oppose US domination of the Muslim world.

That some of those forces happen to use terrorist methods at times, and that they engage in violent politics, is less important to Washington than the fact that they’re against US domination and influence.

+++

The United States was prepared to wage a war against Al Qaeda in Yemen unilaterally, without the cooperation of the former Yemeni government.

Rear Adm. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said “Certainly a willing partner in Yemen…makes missions much more effective. But we have also proven the ability to go after terrorists in various places unilaterally. We … retain that right.” [8]

This was really quite an extraordinary statement, for Kirby was acknowledging in words what was already evident in actions: that the United States does not recognize the sovereignty of any country. It retains the right to intervene anywhere, militarily or otherwise, whether that country’s government assents to the intervention, or not.

The most conspicuous current example of Washington arrogating onto itself the right to intervene unilaterally in any country in pursuit of its foreign policy goals is the US invasion of Syria, carried out over the objection of the Syrian government, and without the slightest regard for the rule of law, which prohibits such affronts against the principle of national sovereignty.

Shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, the CIA persuaded Yemen’s president at the time, Ali Abdullah Saleh, to allow the U.S. military to conduct operations in Yemen against Al Qaeda targets.

Saleh was reluctant to cede Yemen’s sovereignty, but believed that if he refused the US request, Washington would invade (as it reserved the right to do.)

Hence, under duress, Saleh agreed to allow the CIA to fly Predator drones armed with Hellfire missiles over his country and agreed to the entry of US Army Special Forces into Yemen. [9] He agreed, in other words, to the US occupation of his country.

In early 2011, as the US war against Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula was in progress, a massive revolt against the Saleh government broke out, part of the so-called Arab Spring. It involved tens of thousands of Yemenis participating in weeks-long sit-ins.

Washington supported Saleh throughout this distemper, while at the same time demanding that Syrian president Bashar al Assad step down, charging (falsely) that he, Assad, had lost the support of his people.
In contrast, Saleh, despite having no popular support (or very little) enjoyed US backing—and he did so because, unlike Assad, he was willing to cede his country’s sovereignty to the United States.

After months of unrest in Yemen, Washington came to the conclusion that Saleh’s continued rule was no longer viable. He had become far too unpopular and chances were that he would be toppled by the popular revolt. Whoever took his place might not be as compliant.

So, meetings were arranged with leaders of the opposition, to make the case for continuing US operations. Eventually, a plan was agreed to in which Saleh would step down in favor of his vice-president Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi. [10]

Hadi proved to be no more popular than Saleh, although he proved to be just as popular with Washington as his predecessor was. Top US officials supported Hadi because he allowed the Pentagon a free hand in Yemen. [11]

Yemenis, in contrast, didn’t like Hadi—and they didn’t like him for a number of reasons, not least of which was that he was perceived correctly as a puppet of the United States.

In September, 2014, the Houthis, who had launched an insurgency 10 years earlier, seized the capital, demanding a greater share of power.

By February 2015, they had taken control of the government. Soon after, Hadi fled to Saudi Arabia.

What did the Houthis want?

The Houthis self-stated aim – their political project – is to cleanse the country of corrupt leaders beholden to foreign powers. They’re against the interference of the United States and Israel in Yemen’s affairs. A Houthi spokesman said, we’re “simply against the interference of those governments.” [12]

In 2015, Newsweek reported that “In essence what the Houthis call for are things that all Yemenis crave: government accountability, the end to corruption, regular utilities, fair fuel prices, job opportunities for ordinary Yemenis and the end of Western influence.” [13]

Newsweek also reported that “Many Yemenis believe the Houthis are right in pushing out Western influence and decision making.” [14]

So, what was the situation, then, for the United States in February 2015, with the unpopular Hadi government ousted and the Houthis, committed to Yemen’s independence, taking control of the government?

The situation was now much worse than it had been when Washington began its war in Yemen on Al Qaeda. Rather than one group militantly opposing US domination of Yemen, there were now two and control of the government had slipped from the hands of Washington’s marionette. In an effort to reverse a deteriorating situation, Washington instigated a war on the Houthis, overlaying a new war upon its existing war on Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

But the US administration had no legal authorization to wage a war on a group whose remit was internal to Yemen and wasn’t implicated in the 9/11 attacks. The US Congress had provided the US president with an open-ended authorization to “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” [15] That included Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. But it didn’t include the Houthis.

If the United States was to lead a war against the Houthis legally, it would have to seek out and obtain Congress’s authorization. And the chances of the White House obtaining Congress’s consent for a war on the Houthis was next to zero. So Washington prepared a deception. It put the Saudis out front and said the war on the Houthis was Saudi-led.

To give the deception a semblance of credibility, the Saudis were said to view the Houthis as a threat. The Houthis were alleged to be a proxy of Iran, a country the Saudis regard as their principal rival in the Middle East.

But this was nonsense. In April, 2015, the US National Security Council declared that, “It remains our assessment that Iran does not exert command and control over the Houthis in Yemen,” adding “It is wrong to think of the Houthis as a proxy force for Iran.” [16]

The United States instigated the war on the Houthis for two reasons: First, because the Houthis are an organized, militant force against US interference in Yemen. And second, because the Houthis had ousted a government whose subordination to the United States had been useful for Washington in pursuing a campaign to eliminate another organized, militant force against US interference in the Muslim world, namely Al Qaeda.

The aim of the war is to drive the resistant sovereigntist Houthis out and bring the malleable puppet Hadi back in.

So, the United States organized a war using Saudi pilots as the tip of its spear, in exactly the same way it is pursuing a war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria using Kurds as the tip of its spear. In both cases the United States provides command and control, while in Syria and Iraq the Kurds provide the boots on the ground and in Yemen the Saudis provide the pilots in the air. But the war on the Houthis is no more a Saudi-led war than the US war on ISIS is a Kurd-led war.

US leaders don’t put US boots on the ground or US pilots in the air if they can get someone else to do the fighting for them.

As long ago as 1949, the US journalist Marguerite Higgins remarked on how “an intelligent and intensive investment of combat-hardened American men and officers could be used to train local forces to do the shooting for you.” [17]

More recently, in 2015, The Wall Street Journal reported that “America’s special-operations forces, have landed in 81 countries, most of them training local commandos to fight so American troops don’t have to.” [18]

There are a number of advantages for the United States of using local forces to do the fighting so that it doesn’t have to.

First, cost savings. It cost the US Treasury less to have Saudi pilots drop bombs on the Houthis than to have US pilots do the same.

Second, control of public opinion. Consent for yet another US war doesn’t have to be obtained.

Third, certain legal obligations are avoided, such as the need to obtain a legal authorization for war.

From the perspective of the US state, to run a war from behind the scenes, and let local forces assume the burden of being the tip of the spear, is simpler, more cost effective, less troublesome legally, and easier to manage issues of public consent.

Another reason we should believe the war on Yemen is a US- and not a Saudi-led war is that US national security strategy insists on US leadership. It is inconceivable that the United States would cede leadership of a military campaign in which it is involved to a satellite country.

Statements of US leadership abound in the utterances of US politicians, US military leaders, and US commentators.

“We lead the world,” declared former US ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power. [19]

“The question is never whether America should lead, but how we lead,” asserted Obama’s National Security Strategy. [20]

Barbara Stephenson, president of the American Foreign Service Association, describes the United States as having a “global leadership role.” [21]

In his second inaugural address, Bill Clinton described the United States as imbued with a special mission to lead the world. [22]

John McCain recently said that the United States has “an obligation” to lead. [23]

Would a country with such a fixation on leadership willingly assume a back-seat support role in a military campaign in a country in which it had already initiated a war and spent years fighting it? If the answer isn’t obvious, the reality that US war planners provide operation planning of the war should lay to rest any doubts about who’s really in the driver’s seat.

This is a US-led war for empire, against an organized, militant force, which insists on Yemeni sovereignty; which insists on self-determination; and which therefore repudiates US leadership (a euphemism for US despotism and US dictatorship.)

If we’re committed to democracy, we ought to support those who fight against the despotism of empires; we ought to support those who insist on the equality of all peoples to self-determination; we ought to support those who find repugnant the notion that the United States claims a right to intervene in the affairs of any country, regardless of whether the people of that country agree to the intervention or not.

The fight of Yemenis to organize their own affairs, in their own way, in their own interests, by their own efforts, free from the interference of empires and their local proxies, is a fight in which all of us have a stake.

The struggle to end the war on Yemen, and the larger struggle to end the empire-building, the despotism, the dictatorship, of the United States, is not only a struggle for peace, but a struggle for democracy—and a struggle for the Enlightenment values of freedom (from despotism) and equality (of all peoples to determine their own affairs.)

1. Warren Strobel and Jonathan Landay, “Exclusive: As Saudis bombed Yemen, U.S. worried about legal blowback,” Reuters, October 10, 2016.
2. Strobel and Landay.
3. Strobel and Landay.
4. Strobel and Landay.
5. Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt, “Quiet support for Saudis entangles U.S. in Yemen,” The New York Times, March 13, 2016.
6. Gordon Lubold and Paul Sonne, “U.S. troops return to Yemen in battle against Al Qaeda, Pentagon says,” The Wall Street Journal, May 6, 2016.
7. Lubold and Sonne.
8. Damian Paletta and Julian E. Barnes, “Yemen unrest spells setback for U.S.”, The Wall Street Journal, January 23, 2015.
9. Dana Priest, “U.S. military teams, intelligence deeply involved in aiding Yemen on strikes,” The Washington Post, January 27, 2010.
10. Mark Mazzetti, “U.S. is intensifying a secret campaign of Yemen airstrikes”, The New York Times, June 8, 2011.
11. Paletta and Barnes.
12. Ben Hubbard, “Plight of Houthi rebels is clear in visit to Yemen’s capital,” The New York Times, November 26, 2016.
13. “Photo essay: Rise of the Houthis,” Newsweek, February 9, 2015.
14. Newsweek.
15. Authorization for Use of Military Force, S.J.Res.23, September 14, 2001.
16. Kenneth Katzman, “Iran’s Foreign Policy,” Congressional Research Service, August 24, 2016.
17. Bruce Cumings, Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History, W.W. Norton & Company, 2005, p. 255.
18. Michael M. Phillips, “New ways the U.S. projects power around the globe: Commandoes,” The Wall Street Journal, April 24, 2015.
19. “U.S. envoy urges no cut in U.N. funding,” The Associated Press, January 13, 2017.
20. US National Security Strategy, 2015.
21. Felicia Schwartz, “U.S. to reduce staffing at embassy in Cuba in response to mysterious attacks,” The Wall Street Journal, September 29, 2017.
22. William J. Clinton, Inaugural Address. January 20, 1997.
23. Solomon Hughes, “Trump warns McCain: ‘I fight back’,” The Wall Street Journal, October 17, 2017.

https://gowans.wordpress.com/2017/11/06 ... -on-yemen/

Gowans has raised a few eyebrows with the contention that the US is actually fighting AlQueda in Yemen. But maybe so, these outfits with their local franchises(a characterization that may be more accurate than flippant) are probably under less direct control from Washington than is sometimes imagined. Mebbe the spooks put these people in business but cannot count on them 100%. This is not 'bumbling empire but rather accepted risk, the cost of doing business, as it were. And it all comes out in the sauce despite a reverse here and there.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Tue Nov 07, 2017 3:05 pm

LONG LIVE SYRIA‏ @flagrantdolphin 10h10 hours ago

it has come to my attention that there are some grossly incorrect views and analysis in this article which must be addressed

although I commend the author for directly lashing back at the notion of a "Saudi-led" war, which washes clean the imperialists' hands,

for instance, this paragraph in particular. Very wrong, and frankly it plays right into the hands of Empire to say things like this.

Image

Al Qaeda and similar takfiri organizations like their Syrian branch, Al Nusra / JFS / HTS do not "oppose US domination of the Arab worlds"

these takfiri organizations are little more than NATO death squads - their raison d'être is to spearhead imperial efforts to splinter,

defile, and destroy the livelihoods, cities, and dignities of Arab peoples and serve as the shock troops in Empire's quest to dominate and

immiserate them to the point of annihilation. And that's just the tip of the iceberg as far as what they've *actually* done.

Perhaps I'm being a little too diplomatic here----

To suggest that Al Qaeda and similar NATO contras are forces that resist US-NATO

domination of the region is to spit on the graves of SAA, Hezb, and countless other martyrs who gave their lives to defend their nations

against the forces of imperialism and fascist darkness. As Marxists we must endeavor to ruthlessly criticize such distortions.

*******************

Hmmm, am I guilty of being too diplomatic too?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:34 pm

Raqqa’s
dirty secret
By Quentin Sommerville and Riam Dalati
The BBC has uncovered details of a secret deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa, under the gaze of the US and British-led coalition and Kurdish-led forces who control the city.

A convoy included some of IS’s most notorious members and – despite reassurances – dozens of foreign fighters. Some of those have spread out across Syria, even making it as far as Turkey.
Lorry driver Abu Fawzi thought it was going to be just another job.

He drives an 18-wheeler across some of the most dangerous territory in northern Syria. Bombed-out bridges, deep desert sand, even government forces and so-called Islamic State fighters don’t stand in the way of a delivery.

But this time, his load was to be human cargo. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), an alliance of Kurdish and Arab fighters opposed to IS, wanted him to lead a convoy that would take hundreds of families displaced by fighting from the town of Tabqa on the Euphrates river to a camp further north.

The job would take six hours, maximum – or at least that's what he was told.

But when he and his fellow drivers assembled their convoy early on 12 October, they realised they had been lied to.

Instead, it would take three days of hard driving, carrying a deadly cargo - hundreds of IS fighters, their families and tonnes of weapons and ammunition.


Abu Fawzi and dozens of other drivers were promised thousands of dollars for the task but it had to remain secret.

The deal to let IS fighters escape from Raqqa – de facto capital of their self-declared caliphate – had been arranged by local officials. It came after four months of fighting that left the city obliterated and almost devoid of people. It would spare lives and bring fighting to an end. The lives of the Arab, Kurdish and other fighters opposing IS would be spared.

But it also enabled many hundreds of IS fighters to escape from the city. At the time, neither the US and British-led coalition, nor the SDF, which it backs, wanted to admit their part.

Has the pact, which stood as Raqqa’s dirty secret, unleashed a threat to the outside world - one that has enabled militants to spread far and wide across Syria and beyond?

Great pains were taken to hide it from the world. But the BBC has spoken to dozens of people who were either on the convoy, or observed it, and to the men who negotiated the deal.


Out of the city
In a greasy yard in Tabqa, underneath a date palm, three boys are busy at work rebuilding a lorry engine. They are covered in motor oil. Their hair, black and oily, stands on end.

Near them is a group of drivers. Abu Fawzi is at the centre, conspicuous in his bright red jacket. It matches the colour of his beloved 18-wheeler. He’s clearly the leader, quick to offer tea and cigarettes. At first he says he doesn’t want to speak but soon changes his mind.

He and the rest of the drivers are angry. It’s weeks since they risked their lives for a journey that ruined engines and broke axles but still they haven’t been paid. It was a journey to hell and back, he says.

One of the drivers maps out the route of the convoy
One of the drivers maps out the route of the convoy
“We were scared from the moment we entered Raqqa,” he says. “We were supposed to go in with the SDF, but we went alone. As soon as we entered, we saw IS fighters with their weapons and suicide belts on. They booby-trapped our trucks. If something were to go wrong in the deal, they would bomb the entire convoy. Even their children and women had suicide belts on.”

The Kurdish-led SDF cleared Raqqa of media. Islamic State’s escape from its base would not be televised.

Publicly, the SDF said that only a few dozen fighters had been able to leave, all of them locals.

But one lorry driver tells us that isn't true.

We took out around 4,000 people including women and children - our vehicle and their vehicles combined. When we entered Raqqa, we thought there were 200 people to collect. In my vehicle alone, I took 112 people.”

Another driver says the convoy was six to seven kilometres long. It included almost 50 trucks, 13 buses and more than 100 of the Islamic State group’s own vehicles. IS fighters, their faces covered, sat defiantly on top of some of the vehicles.

Footage secretly filmed and passed to us shows lorries towing trailers crammed with armed men. Despite an agreement to take only personal weapons, IS fighters took everything they could carry. Ten trucks were loaded with weapons and ammunition.


The drivers point to a white truck being worked on in the corner of the yard. “Its axle was broken because of the weight of the ammo,” says Abu Fawzi.

This wasn’t so much an evacuation - it was the exodus of so-called Islamic State.

The SDF didn’t want the retreat from Raqqa to look like an escape to victory. No flags or banners would be allowed to be flown from the convoy as it left the city, the deal stipulated.

It was also understood that no foreigners would be allowed to leave Raqqa alive.

Back in May, US Defence Secretary James Mattis described the fight against IS as a war of “annihilation”.“Our intention is that the foreign fighters do not survive the fight to return home to north Africa, to Europe, to America, to Asia, to Africa. We are not going to allow them to do so,” he said on US television.

But foreign fighters – those not from Syria and Iraq - were also able to join the convoy, according to the drivers. One explains:

There was a huge number of foreigners. France, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi, China, Tunisia, Egypt...”

Other drivers chipped in with the names of different nationalities.

In light of the BBC investigation, the coalition now admits the part it played in the deal. Some 250 IS fighters were allowed to leave Raqqa, with 3,500 of their family members.

“We didn’t want anyone to leave,” says Col Ryan Dillon, spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve, the Western coalition against IS.

“But this goes to the heart of our strategy, ‘by, with and through’ local leaders on the ground. It comes down to Syrians – they are the ones fighting and dying, they get to make the decisions regarding operations,” he says.

While a Western officer was present for the negotiations, they didn’t take an “active part” in the discussions. Col Dillon maintains, though, that only four foreign fighters left and they are now in SDF custody.

IS family members prepare to leave
IS family members prepare to leave
As it left the city, the convoy would pass through the well-irrigated cotton and wheat fields north of Raqqa. Small villages gave way to desert. The convoy left the main road and took to tracks across the desert. The trucks found it hard going, but it was much harder for the men behind the wheel.

A friend of Abu Fawzi's rolls up the sleeve of his tunic. Underneath, there are burns on his skin. “Look what they did here,” he says.

According to Abu Fawzi, there were three or four foreigners with each driver. They would beat him and call him names, such as “infidel”, or “pig”.

They might have been helping the fighters escape, but the Arab drivers were abused the entire route, they say. And threatened.

“They said, 'Let us know when you rebuild Raqqa - we will come back,’” says Abu Fawzi. “They were defiant and didn’t care. They accused us of kicking them out of Raqqa.”

A female foreign fighter threatened him with her AK-47.


Into the desert
Shopkeeper Mahmoud doesn’t get intimidated by much.

It was about four in the afternoon when an SDF convoy drove through his town, Shanine, and everyone was told to go indoors.

“We were here and an SDF vehicle stopped by to say there was a truce agreement between them and IS,” he says. “They wanted us to clear the area.”

He is no fan of IS, but he couldn’t miss a business opportunity - even if some of the 4,000 surprise customers driving through his village were armed to the teeth.

Mahmoud's shop
Mahmoud's shop
A small bridge in the village created a bottleneck so the IS fighters got out and went shopping. After months of fighting and taking cover in bunkers, they were pale and hungry. They filed into his shop and, he says, they cleared his shelves.

“A one-eyed Tunisian fighter told me to fear God,” he says. “In a very calm voice, he asked why I had shaved. He said they would come back and enforce Sharia once again. I told him we have no problem with Sharia laws. We're all Muslims.”

Instant noodles, biscuits and snacks - they bought everything they could get their hands on.

They left their weapons outside the shop. The only trouble he had was when three of the fighters spied some cigarettes – contraband in their eyes – and tore up the boxes.


“They didn't appropriate anything, nothing at all,” he says.

“Only three of them went rogue. Other IS fighters even chastised them.”

He says IS paid for what they took.

“They hoovered up the shop. I got overwhelmed by their numbers. Many asked me for prices, but I couldn't answer them because I was busy serving other people. So they left money for me on my desk without me asking.”

Despite the abuse they suffered, the lorry drivers agreed - when it came to money, IS settled its bills.

IS may have been homicidal psychopaths, but they're always correct with the money.”

Says Abu Fawzi with a smile.

North of the village, it’s a different landscape. A lonely tractor ploughs a field, sending a plume of dust and sand into the air that can be seen for miles. There are fewer villages, and it’s here that the convoy sought to disappear.

In Muhanad’s tiny village, people fled as the convoy approached, fearing for their homes - and their lives.

But suddenly, the vehicles turned right, leaving the main road for a desert track.

“Two Humvees were leading the convoy ahead,” says Muhanad. “They were organising it and wouldn't let anyone pass them.”

As the convoy disappeared into the haze of the desert, Muhanad felt no immediate relief. Almost everyone we spoke to says IS threatened to return, its fighters running a finger across their throats as they passed by.

“We've been living in terror for the past four or five years,” says Muhanad.

It will take us a while to rid ourselves of that psychological fear. We feel that they may be coming back for us, or will send sleeper agents. We’re still not sure that they've gone for good.”

Along the route, many people we spoke to said they heard coalition aircraft, sometimes drones, following the convoy.

From the cab of his truck, Abu Fawzi watched as a coalition warplane flew overhead, dropping illumination flares, which lit up the convoy and the road ahead.

When the last of the convoy were about to cross, a US jet flew very low and deployed flares to light up the area. IS fighters shat their pants.”

The coalition now confirms that while it did not have its personnel on the ground, it monitored the convoy from the air.

Past the last SDF checkpoint, inside IS territory - a village between Markada and Al-Souwar - Abu Fawzi reached his destination. His lorry was full of ammunition and IS fighters wanted it hidden.

When he finally made it back to safety, he was asked by the SDF where he’d dumped the goods.

“We showed them the location on the map and he marked it so uncle Trump can bomb it later,” he says.

Raqqa’s freedom was bought with blood, sacrifice and compromise. The deal freed its trapped civilians and ended the fight for the city. No SDF forces would have to die storming the last IS hideout.

But IS didn’t stay put for long. Freed from Raqqa, where they were surrounded, some of the group's most-wanted members have now spread far and wide across Syria and beyond.


The Smugglers
The men who cut fences, climb walls and run through the tunnels out of Syria are reporting a big increase in people fleeing. The collapse of the caliphate is good for business.

“In the past couple of weeks, we’ve had lots of families leaving Raqqa and wanting to leave for Turkey. This week alone, I personally oversaw the smuggling of 20 families,” says Imad, a smuggler on the Turkish-Syrian border.

“Most were foreign but there were Syrians as well.”

He now charges $600 (£460) per person and a minimum of $1,500 for a family.

In this business, clients don’t take kindly to inquiries. But Imad says he’s had “French, Europeans, Chechens, Uzbek”.

“Some were talking in French, others in English, others in some foreign language,” he says.

Walid, another smuggler on a different stretch of the Turkish border, tells the same story.

“We had an influx of families over the past few weeks,” he says. “There were some large families crossing. Our job is to smuggle them through. We've had a lot of foreign families using our services.”

As Turkey has increased border security, the work has become more difficult.

In some areas we’re using ladders, in others we cross through a river, in other areas we're using a steep mountainous trail. It’s a miserable situation.”

However, Walid says it’s a different situation for senior IS figures.

“Those highly placed foreigners have their own networks of smugglers. It’s usually the same people who organised their access to Syria. They co-ordinate with one another.”


Smuggling didn’t work out for everyone. Abu Musab Huthaifa was one of Raqqa’s most notorious figures. The IS intelligence chief was on the convoy out of the city on 12 October.

But now he is behind bars, and his story reflects the final days of the crumbling caliphate.

Islamic State never negotiates. Uncompromising, murderous - this is an enemy that plays by a different set of rules.

At least that’s how the myth goes.

Abu Mus’ab
Abu Mus’ab
But in Raqqa, it behaved no differently from any other losing side. Cornered, exhausted and fearful for their families, IS fighters were bombed to the negotiating table on 10 October.

“Air strikes put pressure on us for almost 10 hours. They killed about 500 or 600 people, fighters and families,” says Abu Musab Huthaifa.

Footage of the coalition air strike that hit one neighbourhood of Raqqa on 11 October shows a human catastrophe behind enemy lines. Amid the screams of the women and children, there is chaos among the IS fighters. The bombs appear especially powerful, especially effective. Activists claim that a building housing 35 women and children was destroyed. It was enough to break their resistance.


Contains distressing material

“After 10 hours, negotiations kicked off again. Those who initially rejected the truce changed their minds. And thus we left Raqqa,” says Abu Musab.

There had been three previous attempts to negotiate a peace deal. A team of four, including local Raqqa officials, now led the talks. One brave soul would cross the front lines on his motorbike relaying messages.

“We were only to leave with our personal weapons and leave all heavy weapons behind. But we didn't have heavy weapons anyway,” Abu Musab says.

Now in jail on the Turkish-Syrian border, he has revealed details of what happened to the convoy when it made it safely to IS territory.

He says the convoy went to the countryside of eastern Syria, not far from the border with Iraq.

Thousands escaped, he says.

Abu Musab’s own attempted escape serves as a warning to the West of the threat from those freed from Raqqa.

How could one of the most notorious of IS chiefs escape through enemy territory and almost evade capture?

“I remained with a group which had set its mind on making its way to Turkey,” Abu Musab says.

Islamic State members were wanted by everyone else outside the group’s shrinking area of control; that meant this small gathering had to pass through swathes of hostile territory.

“We hired a smuggler to navigate us out of SDF-controlled areas,” Abu Musab says.

At first it went well. But smugglers are an unreliable lot. “He abandoned us midway. We were left to fend for ourselves in the midst of SDF areas. From then on, we disbanded and it was every man for himself,” says Abu Musab.

He might have made it to safety if only he’d paid the right person or maybe taken a different route.

The other path is to Idlib, to the west of Raqqa. Countless IS fighters and their families have found a haven there. Foreigners, too, also make it out - including Britons, other Europeans and Central Asians. The costs range from $4,000 (£3,000) per fighter to $20,000 for a large family.


French fighter
Abu Basir al-Faransy, a young Frenchman, left before the going got really tough in Raqqa. He’s now in Idlib, where he says he wants to stay.

The fighting in Raqqa was intense, even back then, he says.

“We were front-line fighters, waging war almost constantly [against the Kurds], living a hard life. We didn't know Raqqa was about to be besieged.”

Disillusioned, weary of the constant fighting and fearing for his life, Abu Basir decided to leave for the safety of Idlib. He now lives in the city.

He was part of an almost exclusively French group within IS, and before he left some of his fellow fighters were given a new mission.

There are some French brothers from our group who left for France to carry out attacks in what would be called a ‘day of reckoning.’”

Much is hidden beneath the rubble of Raqqa and the lies around this deal might easily have stayed buried there too.

The numbers leaving were much higher than local tribal elders admitted. At first the coalition refused to admit the extent of the deal.

The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, somewhat improbably, continue to maintain that no deal was done.

And this may not even have been about freeing civilian hostages. As far as the coalition is concerned, there was no transfer of hostages from IS to coalition or SDF hands.

And despite coalition denials, dozens of foreign fighters, according to eyewitnesses, joined the exodus.

The deal to free IS was about maintaining good relations between the Kurds leading the fight and the Arab communities who surround them.

It was also about minimising casualties. IS was well dug in at the city’s hospital and stadium. Any effort to dislodge it head-on would have been bloody and prolonged.

The war against IS has a twin purpose: first to destroy the so-called caliphate by retaking territory and second, to prevent terror attacks in the world beyond Syria and Iraq.

Raqqa was effectively IS’s capital but it was also a cage - fighters were trapped there.

The deal to save Raqqa may have been worth it.

But it has also meant battle-hardened militants have spread across Syria and further afield – and many of them aren’t done fighting yet.

All names of the people featured in the report have been changed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt ... rty_secret

many photos at link
Bet money this story has not been on US TV, but why is it out there at all? Bet Trump doesn't know about it either.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
Dhalgren
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 6:22 pm
Location: Belly of the beast - south

Re: Syria

Post by Dhalgren » Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:21 pm

Bet money this story has not been on US TV, but why is it out there at all? Bet Trump doesn't know about it either.
If it ain't been on US TV then Trump doesn't know about it.
" If it were necessary to give the briefest possible definition of imperialism we should have to say that imperialism is the monopoly stage of capitalism." Lenin, 1916

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:27 pm

Dhalgren wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 7:21 pm
Bet money this story has not been on US TV, but why is it out there at all? Bet Trump doesn't know about it either.
If it ain't been on US TV then Trump doesn't know about it.
Yep, I was a little redundant there. Proly easier job for the minders than Bush II.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:49 pm

SYRIA: President Assad Delivers Profound Speech about Pan-Arabism at Arab Forum
Posted on November 14, 2017 by Sarah Abed in Syria Related Articles, U.S. Domestic and Foreign Politics, Uncategorized // 2 Comments

DAMASCUS, (ST)- President Bashar Al-Assad has stressed that “hitting national belongingness weakens our first defense line, as a society, against cultural and intellectual invasion attempts that seek turning us into helpless machines that act according to foreign-prepared plans.”

President Al-Assad made the remarks during his meeting on Tuesday, November 14th, 2017 with participants in the Arab Forum on Confronting the US-Zionist reactionary Alliance and Supporting the Palestinian People’s Resistance currently held in Damascus with the participation of Arab national forces and figures.



“Arabism is a cultural concept that involves all ethnic groups, religions, and communities. It is a civilized status to which all who once existed in the region, without exceptions, contributed, said President Al-Assad, adding that “the Arab language and Arab nationalism unite all these ethnic groups, communities and religions and at the same time preserve the privacy of each of them”.

President Al-Assad went on to say that solving the problems facing the Arab nation and restoring brightness to national thinking necessitates hard work as to explain some concepts through which our nation was targeted, including attempts to hit the relation between Arabism and Islam and to put Arab nationalism in a situation of confrontation with other nationalities.

He affirmed the need to clarify the idea that there is no contradiction between belongingness to Arabism and belongingness to Islam as they enhance one another, noting the importance of refuting the ethnic orientation which opposes the national one, particularly in the light of the incessant attempts to divide the region’s countries on an ethnic basis. This can be done, the president said, though stressing the idea that Arabism includes all ethnic groups, religions, and communities, thus Arab heritage and culture is the accumulation of the heritage and cultures of all the peoples who lived in this region throughout ancient and modern history.

President Al-Assad pointed out that national action was also influenced by another factor, which is the policies of some Arab governments which acted against the interests of the Arab peoples by serving foreign schemes and facilitating aggression on other Arab countries, thereby creating a negative reaction by many people towards nationalism and Arabism.

“Here we must differentiate between belongingness to identity and belongingness to a certain political system which we reject its Policies,” the president said.

“Arabism and national thinking have continuously been accused by their enemies of backwardness and of being old-fashioned in an age overwhelmed by globalization in order to turn us into tools to serve the interests of huge financial institutions led by the United States,” President Al-Assad asserted, noting the need to adhere to identity and to support openness and development ideas as to confront this challenge.

President Al-Assad clarified that the main goal of the war to which Syria has been exposed for seven years is to return the country and the entire region centuries back through targeting the national feeling and belongingness to this region and through putting the Arabs in front of two options: either to give up their identity and subjugate to foreign powers or adopt the extremist thinking and turn Arab societies into conflicting entities.

The president affirmed that the ongoing war, despite the huge destruction it caused to Syria, couldn’t weaken the faith of the Syrian people in the inevitability of victory over terrorism and its internal and external tools through the sacrifices of the hero Syrian army and the popular support for this army. It also couldn’t break the Syrians’ will to keep adherent to their identity, doctrine and national belongingness.

Image

Here is full text of President Al-Assad’s speech as reported by SANA
http://sana.sy/en/?p=118170

President al-Assad began his speech by welcoming the participants in the Forum which discusses important pan-Arab issues, as pan-Arabism constitutes identity and affiliation as well as being the past and present of peoples and the basis of their existence.

He said that the participants are now in Syria during the war imposed on it, and that there was a general view that the storm that affected several Arab states including Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Iraq to some degree and the ensuing destruction seek to set the region back by centuries, but the main goal wasn’t destruction as what was destroyed can be rebuilt; rather the goal was undermining the Arab people’s sense of affiliation and belonging to their environment, geography, history, principles, and pan-Arabism.

His Excellency said that undermining pan-Arab affiliation means undermining the first line of defense against any attempts at a cultural or intellectual invasion that seeks to turn people into mere machines with no will that move according to plans made abroad.

“But at the same time, as this Arab spring as it was called by the enemies, aimed at undermining affiliation, without the weakness of pan-Arab affiliation and the weakness of pan-Arab sentiment, this ‘spring’ wouldn’t have been able to start in our Arab region, because segments of our societies have regrettably, through the course of time, after losing this affiliation were ready to move in other directions,” President al-Assad said, adding that these segments went in two directions when the events began: either throwing themselves into the hands of foreigners, regardless of which foreign country, or embracing Islamist extremism as a replacement for the Arab identity, despite it being an abnormal and deviant identity that has nothing to do with Islam or any religion.

“In summation, the enemies succeeded during past decades in making the situation reach its current state and succeeded in undermining society partially, dividing this society into groups, some of them distant and some of them discordant, and others are contentious and conflicting,” he said.

“On the other hand, these meetings and pan-Arab work has persisted throughout these decades, with tens and maybe hundreds of meetings being held, but the result today is that the situation for the pan-Arab condition on the Arab arena is much weaker than it was decades ago. So, do we meet again to add another meeting to a group of meetings? Do we meet to reminisce about the good days or lament bad luck or to glorify something that isn’t living its best days which is the pan-Arab condition? Are we meeting just to issue political statements, despite these being important? It’s necessary to talk politics and issue statements and take positions regarding what is happening constantly, but political statements alone cannot restore the luster of this condition we are talking about now.”

“We are facing a real problem with many aspects, and dealing with just one aspect and disregarding other aspects means that we won’t reach any results and these meetings will remain vocal platforms that have no effect,” President al-Assad said.

His Excellency said that we should start with the problem, discussing it and its solution or cure and the possible methods to reach this cure, and this requires focusing primarily on weaknesses and the methods used by the enemies of pan-Arabism, which will help find a way to deal with each aspect, because what is currently happening isn’t sudden; it is the result of long-term accumulation over decades, and its effects today on societies are deep and wide-scale.

He stressed that this issue isn’t superficial or transient, as the West was skilled in its performance and in setting traps, but the Arabs were good at falling into these traps, noting that the West built its plans on realities and facts and was active, while Arabs always based their visions on sentiments and were emotional.

“Therefore, as I am addressing a pan-Arab conference, I have to discuss some points I consider a priority, and perhaps your conference can form a more comprehensive and in-depth vision through its discussions. So, I will discuss some headlines before talking about anything related to the crisis or policy,” President al-Assad said.

He pointed out that the first major problem facing pan-Arab work is undermining the relationship between Islam and Arabism, as some have accused Arabism of being secular or atheist, tying these three concepts together and telling the simple citizens that they have to choose between faith and atheism, and naturally they chose faith, and therefore they would stand against any affiliation other than faith and Islam, so Arabism is part of the affiliation they moved away from due to this way of thinking or this incorrect marketing of the relation between Arabism and Islam.

His Excellency noted that the first to spearhead this method were the so-called Muslim Brotherhood, who were planted by the English during the first half of the 20th century in Egypt and later moved to other areas, and throughout time they spearheaded everything that opposes the interests of the Arab people and pan-Arab affiliation.

President al-Assad said that there’s an organic connection between Arabism and Islam, and there is certainly no contradiction between them, stressing that it is wrong to believe that one can either be an Arab or a Muslim.

“So, undermining this relation through Islamic extremism undermines Arabism. They diverted Islam and pushed it towards extremism. It separated itself from Arabism, and Islam and Arabism became weaker. Someone might ask why I’m talking about Arabism and Islam and not Arabism and Christianity. I would say that of course, this is the same relationship; the relationship between nationalism and religion, but colonialism and enemies of pan-Arabism didn’t work in this direction, rather they focused on Arabism and Islam,” he explained.

President al-Assad moved on to the second point, saying that pan-Arabism was put against other “nationalities,” and discussing the nature of these nationalities requires separate discussions, but some of these nationalities existed in a diverse region throughout history and they never fought among themselves, so why is this conflict emerging now? This is happening because as Arab states won their independence, colonialism sowed the seeds of sedition among those nationalities and these seeds were nurtured by enemies of pan-Arabism and even some proponents of pan-Arabism through their superficial thinking and ignorant performance.

His Excellency said that this seed has grown and gained root and dealing with it now requires double efforts, adding that these enemies of pan-Arabism achieved this by giving pan-Arabism an ethnic nature, saying that it is exclusive to the Arab ethnicity, and if one doesn’t belong to it then they need to find an identity elsewhere, thereby creating a rift between groups that have coexisted throughout history, and creating a hidden sentiment that we are living together due to political borders and conditions, and when these changes everyone goes their separate ways.

“They focused on the ethnic issue and took away from pan-Arabism the most important civilized aspects in it which are related to the cultural aspect, language, geography, history, and other things,” he added.



President al-Assad said that another cumulative factor linked to political conditions in the Arab world has affected pan-Arab world, and this factor is the result of the bad political work by some Arab states which existed prior to the war but appeared more prominently as the events began, particularly when Arab states and the Arab League provided cover for the intervention and destruction of Libya, then tried to do the same in Syria, but the political conditions had shifted by then so these attempts weren’t exactly successful.

“However, this role pushed many citizens in several places and here in Syria in particular, to say that if this is pan-Arabism and Arabism, then we don’t want them. If these are the Arabs, then we don’t want to be Arabs, we want to be anything else. Well, what is the alternative? There is no alternative. These people are reacting to the conspiring by some Arab states on other Arab states or peoples of causes, and didn’t differentiate between affiliation to a specific identity and affiliation to a political system,” he said, adding that there were reactions towards Arab causes like the Palestinian cause due to the betrayal by some Palestinians of Arab states and peoples that hosted them and defended them, eliciting a reaction, and there were many who said “the whole Palestinian cause can go to Hell,” which indicates the immaturity of the sense of affiliation among these people.

His Excellency went on to address another important point which is that pan-Arabism had been accused of being synonymous with backwardness, which is a hypothesis posed in the 19th century and early 20th century, particularly with the coming of the age of globalization, satellite channels and the internet, which, according to that hypothesis, means that we live in a single world with single principles, interests, and economy, so any form of nationalism is a backwards idea.

“Of course, this is the idea posed by globalization which ultimately aims at having us all belong to the financial institutions that lead the world which are practically centered in the United States, through which they lead politics, economy, and everything else,” President al-Assad said, adding that they tried to claim that Arabism is a passing fad, which is similar to what happened with the fall of the Soviet Union when they wanted to portray socialism and communism as backwards concept.

“Now, after around two and a half decades, things have started to change and inferiority complexes went away. For us in Syria, we never suffered from this inferiority complex at any time, and we used to tell them that even if this language is the language of the 20th or 19th centuries, even if it’s the language of the 1st or 10th century, we will speak it today, tomorrow, and the day after, and we won’t have an inferiority complex. On the contrary, events have proven that the lack of this identity was one of the biggest problems, and adhering to it today is necessary,” he asserted.

His Excellency moved on to address pan-Arab work and the existing political movements, figures, parties, and conferences that have been working for decades under difficult circumstances, as while Syria has been supporting pan-Arabism for many decades, there has been a growing animosity towards pan-Arab work in other states, because this work often made political positions on various Arab causes that embarrassed certain states.

President al-Assad said that there are many people in society who belong to pan-Arabism but disagree with us politically, or have other political visions, or don’t like being involved in the work of political parties, and for them their pan-Arab affiliation is a social and civilized affiliation, adding “This begs the question: where are the non-political aspects of our pan-Arab work? This is a very important aspect.”

Image

His Excellency said that Arabism is a civilized condition, and the most important thing in the civilized condition is the culture it bears, and culture is expressed by language. Without language, the culture turns into a large generator which generates a lot of electricity, but there will be no wires in order to transport this electricity towards the city, factories, or any other place.

“Here in Syria, there is no big problem that we suffer from. After all, education in Syria, including all university stages and others, is in the Arabic language. We support foreign languages, but the Arabic language remains the basis because we understand the meaning of the language,” the President added, stressing that cultural alienation and the dissolution of cultures begins with languages then spreads to other aspects.

President al-Assad said that Syria has suffered from war for seven years, and war weakens any country no matter how strong or large it may be, and this war has exhausted Syria, but it didn’t cause it to collapse. More importantly, it didn’t affect the Syrians’ confidence in the inevitability of victory over terrorism.

“The essence of that war is two groups: first is the persons who lost their affiliation, mainly, the pan-Arab affiliation and the national affiliation. They have lost their identity, the ethics, and with them, they lost the homeland. This is the basis that the foreign side depended on. We can talk about conspiracies for days, but these conspiracies would have never found a place in Syria without the existence of these groups.”

“On the other hand, the other group is mainly the Syrian Arab Army, which has fought and made great sacrifices in order to keep this homeland safe,” His Excellency said, adding that the Syrian Arab Army, before being a national army, is an army that was based on a clear creed which was established throughout decades, stressing that no army would have withstood such a war no matter how much external support it got without having popular support.

“This point, which is the strength of the army through its creed, was understood by our enemies. All political work in conferences and talk of transitional governments and federalism, and all the terms you hear can be summed up with a single thing that was required, which is undermining this concept, the army as a symbol” he said, adding that they target the institutions and society as well, because we are talking about one creed, and all the war was working towards abandoning the notion of pan-Arabism starting with the constitution, to name Syria as just “the Syrian state” and to make its army “Syrian.”

“What was the headline they have put? A professional army, which means that the army which carried out all those battles is an army of armatures, a group of amateurs who liked the game of war and went to fight just because they want to fight anyone, just as a hobby! This is what they are trying to market. For them, the professional army is the army which stays inside the country and waits for a signal from outside in order to move with coups against national governments. According to them, the professional army is that which covers the proxy governments when they relinquish sovereignty and work against the people,” President al-Assad said.

“Today, I affirm after 7 years of sacrifices, that we wouldn’t think for even a second to make concessions about creed and Syria’s pan-Arab affiliation just to appease the rejects of the 21st century of the Muslim Brotherhood and Daesh or al-Nusra, or any other groups, whether outlaws or the groups which work in the interests of the Americans and the West in our region,” His Excellency said.

The President said that if we want to improve the pan-Arab work and see results, this requires coming together and discuss various issues through dialogue, noting that in the past, proponents of pan-Arabism have not held dialogue with others; only with each other, adding “I believe that the starting point begins with dialogue with other groups that went astray, those others that put themselves or who were put by conditions in a place that contradicts their natural belonging and in a place that contradicts their interests and the interest of their homeland without their knowledge, in most cases. Recovering those is the start of the correct work in order to reinforce the pan-Arab work.”

President al-Assad said that such people are like cancerous cells that were originally normal cells that were changed due to various circumstances to become enemies of normal cells in the body, and they are fuel for a poisonous concoction made by the West, but we have to counteract this poison through dialogue.

“First, we have to address the group which is convinced about the contradiction between Islam and Arabism, we have to tell them that there is no contradiction between these two concepts, both flow into the other, both reinforce the other,” he said, stressing they cannot separate the Arabism of Prophet Mohammad from his religion, nor can they separate the religious context of the Quran from the Arabic language, so how can they separate Arabism from Islam?

“It is necessary now to refute the ethnic concept. There are people who talk about federalism, nationalism, and federalism on national basis. We have to assert that the concept of Arabism is an inclusive civilized concept that includes everyone, which means that Arabism is greater than being ethnic, the cultural concept includes everyone, includes all ethnicities, religions, and sects,” President al-Assad said, asserting that Arabism is a civilized condition to which everyone in the region contributed, making it the sum of heritage and cultures of all the peoples who lived in the area throughout old and modern history.

“The most important thing is the language that brings us all together. We all speak Arabic in this region, not other languages, even if there are other languages. .Therefore the Arabic language and pan-Arabism is what brings all religions, sects and ethnics together, and at the same time preserves the characteristics of each one,” he added, noting that after terrorism failed in the region, the enemies started focusing on ethnicities and nationalities.

As for those who renounced Arabism as a reaction to the performance of some Arab states, President al-Assad stressed that the conspiring by these states against Arab causes and the Arab people doesn’t mean that these states belong to Arabism, and affiliation to an identity doesn’t mean affiliation with a political system.

“If they conspire against us, this doesn’t mean that we should run away from the concept and true affiliation and turn things over to those who have nothing to do with Arabism or religion or the societies of this region in everything they did,” he said, stressing that the lack of affiliation doesn’t serve anyone, because the current problems such as sectarian and ethnic division are mainly caused by the lack of pan-Arab sentiment, because people instinctively seek affiliation, and when an encompassing one is absent, they will seek other, smaller ones that lead to the division of minds, geography, and homelands.

“As for linking Arabism to backwardness, we must be the leaders in supporting development ideas, and to have a program that suits this age and suits the interests of the peoples,” the President concluded.

Hamda Mustafa/Dr. Mohamad Abdo Al-Ibrahim Editor-in-Chief

https://sarahabed.com/2017/11/14/syria- ... rab-forum/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:46 pm

President al-Assad with Putin: Coordination on highest levels on combating terrorism, pushing political track forwards

Image

21 November، 2017

Sochi, SANA- President Bashar al-Assad held a summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi City in the presence of senior Russian political and military officials, during a work visit he paid to Russia on Tuesday.

President Putin congratulated President al-Assad on the successes achieved by Syria in the framework of combating terrorism and on approaching victory over terrorism.

Putin underlined the importance of the timing of the visit in increasing coordination between the two sides, holding additional consultations, and listening to the assessment of the Syrian leadership on the situation in Syria and on the shape of the next steps as well as its vision on the political process and the role of the UN in it before the summit during which he will meet his Iranian and Turkish counterparts in Sochi, Russia.

For his part, President al-Assad thanked President Putin for the warm welcome, saying that this meeting comes after two years and few weeks from launching the Russian military operation which supports the Syrian Arab Army in its war against terrorism and which has made significant achievements on different levels, on top, the humanitarian, military and political levels.

President al-Assad indicated that the victories achieved against terrorism led to the return of security to many areas and subsequently, citizens returned to them and the wheel of normal life began to move again, in addition to pushing the political track forwards to find solution to the crisis in Syria.

President al-Assad clarified that the Russian policy has been active on different axes and all of them are important, particularly through affirming the necessity of the UN adherence to its Charter which asserts the sovereignty of the states and the noninterference in their internal affairs and the right of the nations to decide their destiny.

He underlined the importance of this meeting to coordinate on the highest levels between the two sides on different issues which the two countries are interested in including the continuation of combating terrorism, the exerted efforts with regard to the political track, the national dialogue congress and the next tripartite summit in Sochi.

For his part, Putin said that Russia is working with all parties for ending the crisis and finding a political solution in Syria, the issue which constitutes a basic interest for all, adding that this visit is an important opportunity for coordination on the basic principles of organizing the political process, and the issue of the national dialogue congress which Syria has supported.

The two presidents also discussed the current preparations for holding the National Dialogue Congress in Sochi in Russia, as President al-Assad thanked President Putin and the Russian leaderships for the efforts they exerted in this framework, affirming that Syria supports any political work, particularly after the decline of terrorism and that all doors are open locally and internationally to support this track “therefore, we hope that Russia will always succeed in what it says and does…to succeed in convincing the others to not interfere in any political solution, and to only support it from abroad without any interference.”[b/]

President al-Assad asserted that what is important today is to stop the bloodshed, and that Syria is ready to work with any country ready to contribute to the political solution as long as it is based on the Syrian sovereignty and the Syrian decision.

In turn, President Putin expressed Russia’s high appreciation for the readiness expressed by the Syrian Government and its openness on whoever wants peace and for the support provided by President al-Assad to Astana process in which the participants succeeded in establishing de-escalation zones and starting dialogue with all the Syrian parties.

Putin indicated that based on this meeting, he will hold consultations with the presidents who will come to Sochi and that there will be contacts with leaders of several countries “including the US President.”

President al-Assad conveyed thanks by the Syrian people to President Putin and the friendly and loyal Russian people for what Russia has done to protect the Syrians in face of terrorism, and to protect the unity of the Syrian territories, in addition to what the Russian institutions have done to support the Syrian people in all domains, particularly the military institution which has made a lot of sacrifices to protect the sovereignty and independence of Syria and its territorial integrity.

Talks during the meeting also highlighted the importance of continuing to fight terrorism represented in Daesh (ISIS) and Jabhat al-Nusra and the groups affiliated to them.

The two presidents met a group of senior Russian officers who participated in supporting the Syrian Arab Army in its war against terrorism, as President al-Assad underlined the importance of the role played by the Russian Armed Forces in the war against terrorism as Russian military personnel were martyred and the Russian Forces have exerted huge efforts in the battles against terrorism in Syria, indicating that the whole world is watching the significant outcomes achieved on this level thanks to the sacrifices by the Syrian forces and the Russian forces and by Syria’s allies.

The meeting was attended by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, Assistant to Russian President Yuri Ushakov, Russian President’s Special Envoy on Syria, Alexander Lavrentiev, and Director of the Middle East and North Africa Department at the Russian Foreign Ministry, Sergey Vershinin.

http://sana.sy/en/?p=118772

bolding courtesy Phil Greaves

Note that President Assad keeps his nation's sovereignty front and center, leaving little wiggle room for treacherous Russian 'diplomacy'.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Fri Dec 01, 2017 4:47 pm

Briefly about Syria. 11/30/2017
colonelcassad
November 30, 21:28

Image

Which in the current development of the situation in Syria.

Hama.

Image

In the northeastern Hama, SAA continues to push the An-Nusra relatively slowly, bearing considerable losses at the same time. "An-Nusra", despite the problems on a number of sites with the SAA and IGIL, does not miss the opportunity to go into counterattacks, which periodically leads to serious problems for Syrians, up to the loss of newly occupied villages and abandoned armored vehicles. Nevertheless, the current exchange is not in favor of "An-Nusra," which has lost much more territory and suffered substantial losses in manpower. The army is accentuated trying to make its way to the Abu-Dahur air base through a chain of heights and small towns east of the air base. The terrain here is quite convenient for defense, but even in these conditions, the front gradually crawls to the airbase. Her occupation, most likely, will lead to the collapse of the front of "An-Nusra" to the south of Aleppo, although the fate of the IGIL enclave is not fully clear - will the "blacks" keep the busy one from "An-Nusra", waiting until the SAA again surrounds them, or they try to break through into Idliba. The second option would certainly be preferable, since the IGIL objectively draws back part of the forces of An-Nusra. The Syrian command does not even hide that it does not intend to attack Igil here, giving the militants the opportunity to kill each other independently.
In general, the offensive operations in Hama are developing at a traditionally moderate pace, the quantitative and technical preponderance of the SAA and its allies should affect, as the remaining reserves of militants are grinded. The losses, however, will obviously be significant and the Syrian side, but again this is a typical picture for this front.

Eastern Syria.

Image

In East Syria, the situation as a whole without significant strategic changes. SAA repulsed a number of raids of IGIL in the area of ​​T2 and Mayadin, continuing the sweep of militants in the Abu-Kemal area. The remaining units of the IGIL have partially moved to the desert, are partially concentrated in the villages on the bank of the Euphrates, preventing the connection of the Abu Kemal and Mayadin groupings of the SAA and its allies. Given the overlapping of the Iranian proxy border, it is not necessary to count on serious reinforcements from Iraq as "black", although some cargoes of arms and small detachments of militants are still likely to cross the border, since at some sites the control is still formal. But it is not necessary to count on more substantial help. Accordingly, as the remaining units are grinded, the enemy will find it increasingly difficult to compensate for the shortage of already scarce heavy equipment and ammunition to it. Probably, problems with fuel and lubricants can soon begin, as the system of centralized supply of troops of the army of the Caliphate is in fact in a state of collapse. Naturally, there are certain reserves accumulated over the past months, but to ensure the supply of mobile units will become increasingly difficult. A decrease in mobility, will lead to a decrease in the effectiveness of navigational operations. However. for 3-4 months, there should be enough reserves, but they will start serious problems further. The same applies to the BC reserves for heavy weapons. The reserves are obviously exhaustible, and a few trophies can not compensate for the expense and losses. since the system of centralized supply of troops of the army of the Caliphate is in fact in a state of collapse. Naturally, there are certain reserves accumulated over the past months, but to ensure the supply of mobile units will become increasingly difficult. A decrease in mobility, will lead to a decrease in the effectiveness of navigational operations.

The SAA, in turn, with the help of the Allies, will continue to solve the task of occupying the coast of the Euphrates and grinding the units of the Caliphate in contact with each other. On the other side of the Euphrates, attention is now drawn to as much less, obviously, hoping to reach an agreement with the Kurds on good, without having to start a war with them for the amusement of the Americans.

Western Syria.

Image

To the west of Damascus, the SAA continues to try hard enough to digest the cauldron near the Syrian-Israeli border. Over the past couple of days, certain tactical successes have been made here (significant heights are occupied), which creates the prerequisites for further efforts to dismember the boiler into two parts and gradually digest them. Israel is certainly the problem, from which it is reasonable to expect further provocations in the interests of surrounded militants, as it has already been done in the Golan Heights on the pretext of the firing of Israeli territory by militants. But all these movements of Israel are more tactical in nature, since to facilitate the situation of militants there is more likely to need a blow from the outside, for which there is essentially no operational space and very little power. I would suggest that events here may be delayed in early 2018.

Eastern Guta.



In East Gut, despite loud announcements of the next offensive of the SAA in the western part of the enclave, everything was reduced to stubborn position battles near the army base near Harasta and in the Gobar quarter. Successes are mainly measured by busy houses. In passing, counterattacking attempts of militants in the Harasta area were stopped. But the previous losses and the complex nature of the terrain make it difficult to achieve more serious results. Nevertheless, the SAA does not abandon attempts to clear Jobar and chew off the militants a piece of territory south of the Duma.
In general, until the end of the year, it is unlikely that something will be decided and the events are developing in the usual way.

If taken as a whole, the current operations in Syria are more of an inertial nature, where the SAA is trying to move to the stage of finishing, but the enemy is resistant enough (where they have forces), so after a series of autumn successes, now everything is developing more routinely and without loud operational successes. But in the future, the current accumulation of small advantages will enable us to convert them as usual into operational successes. Of course, this will not be free of charge, and the losses of the SAA and its allies will be quite noticeable both in December and in the first months of 2018. On the other hand, an open confrontation in the current situation makes it possible to grind the personnel of local terrorist groups, which will be important at the stage of the inter-Syrian settlement.

PS. It is worth noting two interesting rumors:

1. China allegedly will send special forces to Syria to fight Uighur terrorists who fought as part of jihadist organizations in Syria.
2. Prisoners of ChVKshniki, who were executed by IGILoids in autumn, are allegedly alive and negotiations are underway for their exchange.

There are no confirmations on this subject, but is it not enough ...

It is also worth noting that the former commander-in-chief of the VKS Bondarev, sharply criticized the experience of Mi-28 attack helicopters in Syria.

"Mi-28 brought to mind thanks to Syria. So they [the pilots] say that it's better, but not everything has become better - electronics fail: nothing does not see the pilot, nothing the pilot can not hear. These glasses, which are worn, pilots call "death pilots". The sky is cloudless, everything is fine, and if a smoke - three days with red eyes go. "

Actually, the war on the idea should give abundant practical experience in correcting such shortcomings, which come out in the course of military operations. The technical problems with the Mi-28 during the war have already led to the loss of two vehicles.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/3843780.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Fri Dec 01, 2017 5:29 pm

Terrorists Demand US to Establish Airbase in Damascus

Image

TEHRAN (FNA)- Terrorists in the Eastern Ghouta of Damascus have called on Washington to set up an airbase in the region, media sources said on Thursday.
The Russian Reconciliation Center revealed on its facebook page that at least two terrorist groups in Eastern Damascus have officially demanded the US to establish an airbase in the region.

Noting that the demand has been raised with the aim of weakening Russia's role to end the clashes in the region, the Center said that any move by the US in this regard contradicts the international laws and will delay efforts to establish peace in Syria.

In a relevant development in the same province on Wednesday, the Syrian Army stormed again the strongholds of the Al-Nusra Front (Tahrir al-Sham Hay'at or the Levant Liberation Board) in Southwestern Damascus, coming closer to the terrorists' largest bastion in the region, military sources confirmed on Wednesday.

The sources said that the army soldiers clashed fiercely with Al-Nusra terrorists close to Bardaya hill and managed to seize control over the Eastern direction of the hill covering a region from Northeast of Beit Jinn farm up to the Southwest of the village of Kafr Hoor.

A large number of Al-Nusra fighters were killed and their military equipment was destroyed in the attack, they said.

The sources went on to say that the Bardaya hill is of paramount importance and its capture by the army will enable the government forces to access Beit Jinn farm that is one of the largest bastions of Al-Nusra in Western Ghouta.

In the meantime, the Al-Nusra's missile and artillery units targeted army positions in Tal al-Sha'ar region in Eastern Quneitra to back up their comrades in Beit Jinn and slow down the army's advances in the region.

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960909000509
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Syria

Post by blindpig » Mon Dec 04, 2017 4:12 pm

PKK/PYD, US 'let Daesh go free on 3 occasions' in Syria
Former SDF spokesman says Raqqah was not only place PKK/PYD, US negotiated evacuation of Daesh terrorists

Image
Former SDF spokesman Talal Silo speaks to Anadolu Agency

The former spokesman of the SDF, an armed Syrian group dominated by the terrorist PKK/PYD, has told Anadolu Agency that the SDF and the U.S. allowed Daesh terrorists to escape on three separate occasions.

Talal Silo, a former high-ranking commander, is currently in Turkey after defecting from the SDF last month.

He revealed details of the U.S. military’s support to the PKK/PYD, also known as the YPG, and deals struck under the guise of combating Daesh.

Anadolu Agency (AA): How did your first contact with the Americans happen?

Talal Silo (TS): They wanted to meet me outside Syria. They came with a vehicle like a helicopter. They took me to Erbil [the capital of Iraq’s Kurdish territory]. I stayed for two days at the U.S. base in Erbil airport. We discussed coordinating work and media matters. We identified the media that supported the SDF [and] we discussed which ones we could give interviews to.

AA: Did you have direct contact with senior American officials?

TS: Meetings took place directly. I also participated in these negotiations. I participated in the meetings with Brett McGurk [the U.S. special representative for fighting Daesh], Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend [commander of Inherent Resolve, the anti-Daesh operation in Syria and Iraq] and U.S. Central Command chief Gen. Joseph Votel.

Sahin Cilo [SDF general commander, a senior PKK/PYD figure] appointed those who were to attend from our side. I attended all the meetings at the Celebi base [northern Syria]. We had a meeting with the U.S. Foreign Affairs Committee. There was complete coordination between Cilo and the U.S. administration.

AA: Why did you include Hatay [a Turkish province] in the PKK/PYD’s front organization SDF map emblem of Syria?

TS: Cilo told us: ‘The Syrian state was founded by losing one province to Turkey. But we cannot give up on it’. We had this meeting in Hasakah [northwest Syria] at the YPG’s public relations building.

AA: How did you decide on what to say as the SDF spokesman?

TS: I was appointed to the spokesman position on Cilo’s order. Once appointed, Bahoz Erdal [then the PKK’s Syria representative] invited me for a meal at Karachok [in Syria]. We talked about everything. He gave me a gun as gift.

At the SDF, instructions to make statements came from Cilo. He sent me the statements either through WhatsApp or Viber. I copy edited. Nurettin Sofi came after Bahoz Erdal left. He [Sofi], also supervised the statements [as Cilo’s superior].

I even published condolence messages on approval. The statement I read on the rescue of Raqqah was also given to me by Cilo. I don’t think he wrote it either. He did not have such a capability.

AA: Were there any press statements demanded by the Americans?

TS: They wanted us to condemn an explosion in Turkey. They also wanted to make a statement that the SDF was not related to the PKK. Cilo gave the statement. When Cilo was asked the reason, he said ‘The U.S. wanted it. Thus, it will be shown that there is no relation between us [the SDF] and the PKK’. Our role was on paper.

AA: How was communication between the so-called SDF and the Qandil leaders of the PKK carried out?

TS: Even though Sahin Cilo was the SDF general commander, he did not have a say. The instructions came from Bahoz Erdal and Bahoz was taking orders from Sabri Ok [senior PKK leader]. It took me two years to figure out these relationships. It was not easy.

In particular, they had to keep me at the meetings with the U.S. I even attended the delivery of guns. I had gained their confidence during this time. I had grasped all of their private secrets. The PKK is making military, civil and economic decisions in the region. All decisions are taken from Qandil [the PKK’s main base, in Iraq], and those there [Syria] just apply them.

AA: How did the PKK/PYD start receiving support from the U.S. under the name of SDF?

TS: Since the foundation of SDF there had been weapon and ammunition support from the U.S. They were parachuting them to the YPG.

After the declaration of the SDF, the weapon and ammunition support was made under different names without mentioning the Kurdish element at the request of the U.S.

I also received two shipments of guns. The ones we received were light weapons. They were Russian-made. An American delegation arrived when the SDF was established.

The SDF military council members' fingerprints and retina were scanned and photographs were taken.

When they first arrived on the ground, the Americans settled at a small base in Istirahat al-Wazir, located between Tall Tamr and Hasakah. They made it into a helipad. They established a second base named Tal Baidar near the Dirbasiye road. A helicopter base was also established here.

They were giving us weapons from there. They were also coming from the Semalka border crossing [on the Syria-Iraq border] as well.

Then the Celebi base came into effect. It used to be a cement factory. It was near Sarrin, located between Ain Issa and Qere Qozaq bridge. They built a big U.S. base there. It is the main station for all the support provided to SDF. The support increased when the Celebi base came into force.

We got full support after Trump arrived. We have seen hundreds of military vehicles carrying military supplies from the Semalka border gate. They all got moved to Celebi. From there, it is given to the YPG under the guise of the SDF.

On arriving at Celebi, there is a YPG representative whose name is Hemin. He provides coordination. Whether it's a gun or a vehicle, he receives them. He sometimes leaves it at the base, sometimes he places them at the main station in the same region. He also delivers them to the YPG’s commander in charge of arms… He then distributes them to certain regions.

AA: What kind of support does the U.S. provide, other than weapons assistance?

TS: They provide military training. There was a camp built for this purpose. There are health centers for treatment. They use it for first aid and quick surgical operations. There are American and French health care teams. The French also provided sniper training.

AA: Did you get any signal of the U.S. stopping support?

TS: According to recent statements by the U.S., there will be no more delivery of weapons. But they have already received enough weapons. There is no limit on the money they received.

AA: Can the PKK/PYD act independently of the U.S.?

TS: No moves can be made without the approval of the U.S. because the U.S. provides support, especially air support. The Americans cannot eliminate Daesh without ground operations. Everybody knew that.

AA: Are there no conflicts between the PKK/PYD leaders and the U.S.?

TS: There are no conflicts because the two sides have established an alliance on all matters. The U.S. provided open and unlimited military support to the SDF. There is a common benefit in acting together.

The interest of the SDF or the PKK was to dominate all these regions and indeed they did. This would not have happened without the U.S.

AA: What is the extent of U.S. military presence on Syrian territory?

TS: There are currently 2,000 American soldiers, according to what we have been told. There are trainers, consultants and liaison officers for air operations. There are marine batteries and special forces personnel. There are other countries as well -- England, France, Denmark -- but very few.

AA: What is the influence of Brett McGurk [the U.S. special representative for the anti-Daesh coalition] in Syria?

TS: He has been very effective since the beginning. For instance, in our first meeting at Celebi base, the liberation of Manbij was discussed. He was the one who suggested it. He said that in order to persuade the Turkish side, a special military council for the city, mainly formed by Arabs, must be established.

Thus, he wanted to create the perception that the city’s own sons had saved Manbij. We saw the same suggestion in Raqqah. When making these proposals, he said: ‘We need to convince the Turkish side.’ So he told us we had to give the impression of Arab elements being on the ground.

The Manbij Turkmen Units appeared on the Manbij Military Council but there was nobody. I even wrote made-up names on the council that were linked to me. It was done at McGurk’s request.

Again, in the Raqqah operation, it was announced that only the Arab coalition would participate. Actually, there was no such thing as the Arab coalition. McGurk was directing the SDF’s hidden policies given under the command of Sahin and Cilo.

Following the rescue of Manbij, he [McGurk] wanted us to release a statement that the SDF had rescued the city and the YPG had pulled out of the city and that those staying were the locals of the city. There was obviously no connection to the reality.

AA: The PKK/PYD’s agreement with Daesh in Raqqah to help them leave caused a big reaction. What happened in Raqqah?

TS: The Raqqah negotiations were done at the SDF’s general headquarters in Ain Issa. They lasted for two days. Abu Muhammad [who liaised with Daesh], Cilo and his deputy Kahraman met.

Daesh did not have any other place to go but Deir ez-Zor. The U.S. seemed to agree with that. Because the SDF made two moves [in Raqqah and Deir ez-Zor] at the same time, their men in Deir ez-Zor were weak.

The U.S. wanted the SDF to start the Deir ez-Zor operation to reach the Iraqi border before the [Syrian] regime army arrived.

According to the Americans, the regime army could reach Deir ez-Zor in six weeks. But when the regime army proceeded faster than expected, the U.S. wanted the SDF to begin negotiations with Daesh.

Thus, the terrorists would go to Al-Bukamal [near the Iraqi border] and prevent the regime’s advance. Talks were held to allow 3,500 terrorists to leave. There were about 500 women and children.

The U.S. and Cilo wanted these terrorists to reach Deir ez-Zor before the Syrian regime army. For this reason, the ones leaving Raqqah would not be shot.

The same day, Cilo asked me to stage a drama in front of the press. As the media team, we prepared the ‘drama’. According to the drama, at the initiative of Arab tribes from Raqqah, 275 local Daesh terrorists had surrendered to the SDF. In return, 3,500 so-called civilians were going to be released.

In the drama, to show the presence of 275 people they brought some people from Ain Issa camp. They played a second drama to the press.

They forbid journalists from going to Raqqah. They told the journalists that they would fight foreign Daesh members who are unwilling to leave the area. But they did not even shoot a bullet.

During this time, Daesh members who left the city, reached the places they were going. Then we announced that Raqqah was taken.

We found out later that some of Daesh members gave bribes and went to other places. Most of them entered the Operation Euphrates Shield area [areas of Syria towards the Turkey border previously cleared of Daesh by Turkish-backed fighters].

AA: What did you see when you entered Raqqah?

TS: What happened in Raqqah was not saving the city but demolishing it. I went there the day we were going to declare it’s clearance.

Unfortunately, I was shocked by the magnitude of the destruction in the city. More than 95 percent of it was destroyed.

The aim of establishing the SDF was to save our people and our land from Daesh’s terror and oppression. But if what I saw was salvation, there was no need for such salvation because it was destruction.

Destruction was carried out at the hands of both sides. The SDF destroyed it and the U.S. caused the destruction of the entire city. I still do not know the reason.

Later, the Raqqah Civilian Council asked for financial support from the international community to reconstruct the city. They seemed to get personal benefits on the pretext of the city's reconstruction.

AA: Were there any other collusions like Raqqah?

TS: Raqqah was not the first place where they evacuated Daesh by agreement. It was the third. The U.S. and Cilo did it by common consent.

The Manbij Military Council issued a statement just before Manbij was declared clear. It announced that 2,000 Daesh members were allowed to leave the city with human shields. The SDF, the U.S. and Manbij Military Council provided security for Daesh members and allowed them to go towards Jarablus. This was the first agreement.

AA: Where was the other agreement between PKK/PYD and Daesh?

TS: The other one was in Al Tabqah [on the Euphrates River]. Tabqah is divided into two -- the dam area and the resident area, Sevre. Tabqah was recovered and it was announced. But Sevre was not.

Operations were launched so many times but they failed. Daesh resisted strongly. They were obliged to negotiate. Abu Muhammad stepped in. His sister’s husband was a Daesh commander in Tabqah. He was asked to meet Daesh for the safe exit of 500 terrorists by Cilo and the Americans.

Daesh’s demand was to go to Tabqah from Raqqah with their weapons and ammunition. After Cilo met the Americans on our behalf, Daesh’s safe exit was allowed.

AA: Turkey had proposed the U.S. to take Raqqah through a joint operation. Did the U.S. convey this on the ground?

TS: I also attended that meeting [in Celebi base] at which the Americans brought that proposal. McGurk and [U.S. Senator] John McCain were there.

McCain said Turkey proposed to send its troops to Raqqah along with Arab fighters through a 25-kilometer corridor to be opened from Tell Abiad.

What McCain brought was just a proposal, it was not binding.

When Sahin Cilo realized that he said they would not open even a 25-centimeter corridor for Turkey and those who would accompany them. McCain was content with those words.

Then, we talked about the SDF’s weapon demands. McCain reiterated his support. He promised to help. He said they would oppose only one thing -- they could not give anti- aircraft guns.

AA: The U.S. reacted by written statement to the terrorist leader Ocalan’s posters being displayed in Raqqah. What happened between the parties?

TS: The Americans had always warned about posters and slogans to avoid difficulty for the organization in terms of public opinion. The Kurdish side did not accept the warning.

There were posters of Ocalan in places where the Americans met us. One was even present at the first congress of the SDF. All of the flags in the region are of the YPG, the YPJ, etc. So, you cannot see any SDF flags.

The Americans know full well who they are working with.

AA: Did not the leaders of organization asked for open support in the international arena for the PKK/KCK, which is the main body of the organization, in return for the support they provided?

TS: How much more support would it be? The PKK needs weapons and financial support. The weapons go to SDF and from there to the YPG. They reach the PKK from the YPG. So Sahin Cilo does not need to tell them to give weapons to the PKK. At the end, they already reached the PKK through the YPG.

http://aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/pkk-pyd ... ria/989213
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply