In a world obsessed with "branding" and the images associated with each brand, a group of military units opposed to Assad not stained with the diabolical deeds of ISIS are by default moderate.
The term "moderate opposition" is used by those who deny Assad is a legitimate leader. They have cited numerous reasons for proclaiming his illegitimacy, which includes that he is responsible for the death toll of roughly 250,000 in Syria.
Current U.S. National Security Adviser (and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations) Susan Rice repeats this accusation:
Obama echoed this claim that Assad is an illegitimate leader. Obama stated during his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 28, 2015:
Nowhere is our commitment to international order more tested than in Syria. When a dictator slaughters tens of thousands of his own people, that is not just a matter of one nation’s internal affairs — it breeds human suffering on an order of magnitude that affects us all. [1]Obama values his rhetorical power so much he believes his words speak to humanity's collective conscience.
Meanwhile, Hillary Rodham Clinton carried the anti-Assad torch to her speech to the Council on Foreign Relations:
Our increased support should go hand in hand with increased support from our Arab and European partners, including special forces who can contribute to the fight on the ground. We should also work with the coalition and the neighbors to impose no-fly zones that will stop Assad from slaughtering civilians and the opposition from the air. [2]Clinton now proposes a more proactive strategy compared to her earlier assessment that the Arab Spring's inherent power would unleash an inevitable force toppling Assad. In her memoirs she states:
In the early days of the fighting many had assumed Assad's fall was inevitable (italics added) After all, the previous leaders of Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen were all gone. It was hard to imagine that, after so much bloodshed and getting a taste of freedom, the Syrian people would just settle down and agree to accept dictatorial rule once again. But now, in the second year of civil war, it seemed increasingly possible that Assad would hang on, even if it meant tearing the country apart and fomenting destructive sectarian strife. Syria could be doomed to a long and bloody stalemate. Or it could become a failed state, with the structure of government collapsing and chaos ensuing. And the longer the conflict dragged on, the more danger there was that the instability would destabilize vulnerable neighbors, like Jordan and Lebanon, and the more likely it was that extremists would build support inside Syria. [3]Now Clinton's comments in this passage restates the lie that Assad's remaining in power motivates jihadist uprisings in Syria. By inference, Assad's refusal to surrender power indemnifies him to the increasing death toll. Clinton's causal claim about the cause of radical jihadists in Syria is both shared by Obama and current U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power ; but, is contradicted by reports completed by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The DIA stated in their report that:
AQI (Al Quaeda In Iraq) SUPPORTED THE SYRIAN OPPOSITION FROM THE BEGINNING, BOTH IDEOLOGICALLY AND THROUGH THE MEDIA….. AQI CONDUCTED A NUMBER OF OPERATIONS IN SEVERAL SYRIAN CITIES UNDER THE NAME JAISH AL NUSRAH (VICTORIOUS ARMY) [4]This DIA revelation certainly deserves more consideration when Clinton and Co. continue stating Assad's actions created ISIS presence in Syria. If ISIS or Al-Quaeda exercised this much influence over events in Syria at the onset of the revolt in 2011, then that weakens the U.S. premise for claiming Assad is an illegitimate ruler.
These were reports were completed in August and September 2012 and "were sent to the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, State Department, Department of Defense and U.S. Central Command." The diplomatic and military establishment heads were aware of these dangerous developments. Their foreknowledge of these ominous developments prompt the predictable recriminatory questions: "Why didn't they take necessary actions or implement policy changes in order to mitigate hopefully the damage sustained by a resurgent Sunni movement?" Instead, Clinton and fellow operatives of the U.S. Empire and their media echo chamber continue in a catatonic state covering for a virtual Emperor with no clothes.
The Assad as brutal dictator meme has permeated much of the establishment and mainstream media consciousness, which is further evidenced by a story published in the "The Daily Beast" discussing Republican U.S. Presidential candidates Senator Ted Cruz's and Senator Marco Rubio's disagreement on whether Assad should remain in power. Cruz currently opposes regime change while Rubio favors it. The Daily Beast introduction of this story further promotes the narrative of Assad embodying dictatorship:
The two GOP candidates could not have more different plans when it comes to what to do with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.[5]This article presupposes that policy proposals for Syria entail dealing with a dictator. Therefore, the thrust of debates about Syria revolve around either overthrowing or accepting a dictator. Also, this either/or proposition is used to impugn Russia's bombing campaign in Syria.
Hillary Clinton claims this duality of either fighting Assad or ISIS is a false choice, establishing a moral equivalence of both Assad and ISIS.
These establishment figures maintain strong discipline by inserting anti-Assad vitriol in every conversation or speech about fighting ISIS.
In each of the anti-Assad examples cited above, they cite no empirical evidence supporting their claims that Assad is a brutal dictator massacring his own people. The media outlets broadcasting or publishing these "leaders'" anti-Assad accusations neglect to demand they cite accessible and supportive evidence.
What is the basis for the constant claims that Assad is a brutal dictator, and by inference concluding his regime must end? The statistics obtained on casualties in Syria from the start of the "civil war" are filtered through a bottleneck. Nonetheless, Anti-Assad voices' use statistics to support their narrative-shaping propaganda. Supposedly Western culture promotes diversity. Yet diversity of sources is not their objective when tallying the casualties in Syria from 2011-present. Whenever they publish casualty figures they usually cite 1 or 2 sources: Syrian Observatory on Human Rights (SOHR) and the Violations Documentation Centre (VDC).
One notable example of this reduction of sources compiling casualty figures is the U.N.ceasing tracking this figure because they claim "lack of access to the ground." [6]. Consequently, the number of information sources has dwindled, resulting in the SOHR becoming a frequently cited authority on casualty figures. Just how reliable is SOHR's data?
Also, VDC publishes figures that if true would impugn Assad as the primary cause of deaths. Their statistical inference though is weakened by their definitions used to categorize the casualties. For example:
Among adult males civilians are 53%, and combatants are 28 percent meaning that adults males together, who are roughly a third of Syria’s population, make up 81% of the total death toll.There are two main reasons to suggest that large numbers of deaths listed as adult male civilians are indeed armed combatantsFirstly, of the 32,772 adult male combatants, ~87% are listed as FSA – ‘Free Syrian Army’.This proportion appears unusually high especially since the majority of the SAA’s battles these days are against other more prominent militias such as the Islamic State (ISIS), the Islamic Front, and the Al-Nusra Front.Whatever their motives, it’s quite possible the VDC are listing fighters from other militias as civilians. [7]
These groupings imply that only deaths of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) account for a significant amount of anti regime opponents. Moreover, the study ignores the fact that Assad's main military clashes involve al-Nusra and ISIS. Thus it is possible that these two groups comprise a significant amount of the "male civilian casualties." SOHR's and VDC's attributing most of the casualties directly to Assad and the Syrian National Army renders their conclusions questionable.
The body of accumulated casualty figures do not support concluding Assad is a "brutal dictator," whose actions warrant the U.S. and the Syrian "moderate rebels" overthrowing him. Such conclusions are not based on empirical data. Rather, the U.S. is simply relying on raw power to impose a narrative on Assad. If the world relied mostly on statistics of casualties to determine whose regime is legitimate, then would it conclude that one million plus deaths occurring in Iraq from the U.S. invasion in 2003 de-legitimize both U.S. Presidencies of George W. Bush and Barrack Obama? Of course not because they benefit from serving an empire, a hegemonic power, allowing their starting wars with impunity.
Their example proves truth and power can and do exist on separate paths and their crossing each other is coincidental. Tragically, as World War III seems closer each day, it becomes more obvious that the U.S. and its allies promoting an anti-Assad narrative is not a coincidence.
[1]. "President Obama's Speech to the United Nations General Assembly 2015." The New York Times. September 28, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/world/americas/president-obamas-speech-to-the-united-nations-general-assembly-2015.html?_r=0
[2]. Clinton, Hillary. "Transcript: Read Hillary Clinton's Speech on Fighting ISIS." posted by Ryan Teague Beckwith. TIME. Nov 19, 2015. http://time.com/4120295/hillary-clinton-foreign-policy-isis/
[3]. Clinton, Hillary Rodham. Hard Choices. Simon & Schuster. New York. 2014. see chapter 19. pp 378-98.
[4]. Declassified document. pgs. 297-93 (291) JW v DOD and State 14-812 May 18, 2015. Judicial Watch. http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-287-293-291-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812-2/
[5]. Mak, Tim and Betsy Woodruff. "Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio Battle Over Syria Regime Change." The Daily Beast. Dec 04 2105. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/04/ted-cruz-and-marco-rubio-battle-over-syria-regime-change.html
[6]. Heilprin, John. "UN Decides To Stop Updating Syria Death Toll." The World Post A Partnership Of The Huffington Post And Berggruen Institute. 01/25/2014. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/07/un-stops-updating-syria-death-toll_n_4554226.html
[7]. Tharappel, Jay. "Who's responsible for the civilian death toll in Syria?" thewallwillfall. June 01, 2015. https://thewallwillfall.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/whos-responsible-for-the-civilian-death-toll-in-syria-jay-tharappel/
No comments:
Post a Comment