So it's the intensifying clash
of these two outmoded forces--imperialism on one side and Islamic fundamentalism
on the other--and the U.S. need to solidify its control of the Middle East that
is propelling this regional confrontation, U.S. actions in Syria, and the
danger of a U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. British author and journalist Patrick
Seale summed up the battle over Syria as "a struggle between the United States,
on the one hand, and its allies, and its opponents like Russia and China ...
for regional dominance, who is to be top dog.... [T]his as a concerted attack,
assault, on not only Syria, but Iran, as well. You see, Iran, Syria and their
ally Hezbollah in Lebanon, that trio, a sort of Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis,
has in recent years been the main obstacle to American and Israeli hegemony in
the Middle East. And the attempt now is to bring that axis down.... So that's
what we're witnessing. It's a struggle for regional supremacy, regional
dominance...." ("A Struggle for Regional
Supremacy: Syria Conflict Escalates as World Powers Debate Assad's Future,"
Democracy Now!, February 7, 2012)
U.S. Strategy: Managed, Pro-U.S. Regime Change
The U.S. has moved cautiously in
Syria for a number of reasons. First, it's been unclear whether Assad could be
forced to step down. Second, the U.S. does not want to ignite a full-scale
civil war in Syria or the region. As the New York Times noted, Syria sits "at
the center of ethnic, religious and regional rivalries that give it the
potential to become a whirlpool that draws in powers, great and small, in the
region and beyond." ("Syrian Conflict Poses the Risk of Wider Strife," Steven
Erlanger, February 25, 2012) Finally, the U.S. worries that the Syrian military
remains powerful and coherent, so any direct military intervention could prove
costly and difficult.
Nonetheless, the U.S. has
steadily escalated its pressure on the Assad regime on many different fronts.
It has attempted to organize an international anti-Assad coalition.
A World To Win News Service
reports, "[T]he U.S. is already backing various forms of intervention in Syria,
including Turkey's efforts to use Syrian military opposition elements to form
an army under its control, and the money and arms allegedly pouring into the
country from Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are almost undoubtedly backing
fellow Sunni Islamic fundamentalists, as they have everywhere else." ("Syria,
No to Assad, no to foreign intervention!," Revolution #261, February 26, 2012)
The U.S. is attempting to
coordinate and strengthen the reactionary forces attempting to lead the Syrian
uprising, and recently the imperialist intelligence group STRATFOR reported
that U.S. Special Forces had been operating inside Syria since December.
("Stratfor Emails: Covert Special Ops Inside Syria Since December," John
Glaser, antiwar.com, March 7, 2012)
The Obama administration has
stepped up planning for possible "humanitarian relief, no-fly zone, maritime
interdiction, humanitarian corridor, and limited aerial strikes" among other
options. (General Martin Dempsey, quoted on Democracy Now!, March 8, 2012) In
late March, the administration announced it would provide "non-lethal aid" to
the opposition, a step which has often been a prelude to military support. And
the U.S. is continuing to diplomatically isolate the Assad regime, including by
pushing through a UN resolution calling for a ceasefire and halt to its
military assaults on the opposition.
Nothing Good Can Come of U.S. Intervention in Syria--Or U.S. Control of
the Middle East
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
