Washington Is Overtly Supporting Al-Qaeda In Syria: Prof. James H. Fetzer
Interview by Kourosh Ziabari
13 July, 2013
American philosopher and political author James H. Fetzer believes that the United States is openly supporting Al-Qaeda and the extremist Salafist and Takfiri groups in Syria and equipping the rebels and insurgents inside the country with sophisticated weapons and arms.
“The Assad forces are making great progress in putting down the artificial uprising, which gained public sympathy because of false flag massacres of villages in Syria, which were blamed on the government but appear to have been committed by mercenaries and others, just as the UN itself has concluded that the alleged use of chemical weapons in small quantities appears to have been done, not by the government, but by the rebels,” said Fetzer in an exclusive interview with the Fars News Agency.
James H. Fetzer is a retired philosophy professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth . He has written several books on the philosophy of science, artificial intelligence, evolution and also tens of political articles about the 9/11 events and the U.S. foreign policy. Fetzer's articles have appeared on a number of print and online publications including Veterans Today and Press TV.
In the wake of the ongoing crisis in Syria and the continued confrontation between the government forces and the foreign mercenaries, FNA has conducted an exclusive interview with Prof. Fetzer. What follows is the text of the interview.
Q: Several Arab countries have dispatched mercenaries and fighters to take part in the ongoing battle against the government of President Bashar al-Assad. In what ways do these countries benefit from instability and insecurity in Syria ? Why are they sending terrorists and fighters to Syria ?
A: That Saudi Arabia and Qatar are both involved when they are both allies of the United States yet support diverse objectives reflects the complexity of the situation. Qatar supports the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, which came to power in Egypt and Tunisia , but where the Egyptian military coup has now stemmed that ascent. The U.S.-Saudi alliance appears to be intended to minimize the influence of the Brotherhood, while creating a counter-balance to the influence of Iran in the Middle East , which Israel also supports.
While the Brotherhood was founded in 1928 and may be the best organized and most politically powerful Arab political movement, its participation in the attempt to assassinate Gamal Abdel Nasser led to a political crackdown in Egypt , where many of its followers found refuge in Saudi Arabia . After supporting the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya , the Saudis appear to be increasingly concerned about an increase in its influence, which they fear will promote Shiite interests at the expense of Sunni.
The Persian Gulf Cooperation Council--which was created to fashion a common plan among the Sunni monarchies of Saudi Arabia , UAE, Bahrain , Kuwait , Qatar and Oman --to resist Iran and support the Syrian rebels--has its own internal conflicts, where Saudi Arabia and Qatar are especially concerned that the Assad regime might prevail and the influence of Shiite Iran be enhanced. It therefore appears that a mix of religious and political motives have led to their involvement with and support of the Syrian rebels.
Q: There are certain Western states who are opposed to the involvement of Iran in the peace talks to end the crisis in Syria . Why do these countries don't accept the fact that Iran is an essential and integral part of solution for bringing to an end the two-year long unrest in Syria?
A: The United States may be attempting to replay the events in Afghanistan by providing weapons to the rebels, where Stinger missiles, especially, were instrumental in shooting down large numbers of its helicopters and planes and driving the Soviets out of Afghanistan, which is well portrayed in the film, “Charlie Wilson's Role”, apart from omitting the crucial role of Osama bin Laden, who was “our man in Afghanistan”. The demonization of bin Laden and of al-Qaeda for the attacks of 9/11, which were carried out by the CIA, American neo-cons in the Pentagon and the Mossad, further complicates understanding what has been taking place in Syria . Al-Qaeda was a creation of the CIA.
For Western nations to oppose the participation of Iran in peace talks is completely absurd. Since important elements of the Syrian rebel force has openly allied itself with al-Qaeda, current US foreign policy in attacking al-Qaeda in Afghanistan , but supporting it in Syria , is inconsistent and even bizarre. This case represents the kinds of complications that are compounded by one set of lies (about 9/11) becoming intertwined by another – in relation to Syria and Iran . The duplicity of the U.S. media makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for the American public to understand the depths of duplicity of U.S. involvement in the Middle East , which is predicated upon lies nested within lies.
Q: Turkey had always tried to maintain a policy of “zero problems with the neighbors” but today it is one of the main fronts of war on Syria and the government of President Assad. Why has Turkey engaged in the destructive activities and plots which continue to undermine Syria 's peace and stability? Why does the Turkish government allow the smuggling of arms and weaponry into Syria 's soil through its borders?
A: On 30 January 2013, following the first Israeli attack on Damascus, Turkey's Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, criticized Syria for not attacking Israel and blamed it for committing crimes against its own people, which appear to have been committed by NATO and mercenary forces instead. For Syrian to take on Israel at that point in time, when Israel has 200-600 nukes and Syrian has none, would have been foolhardy. Russian intervention on behalf of Syria , however, has completely reversed the balance of force and will moderate Turkish enthusiasm for further involvement in Syria .
Benjamin Netanyahu went to considerable lengths to induce Barak Obama to draw “a red line”, which became the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government against its own people. This was a transparently obvious form of entrapment since, once Obama committed the U.S. to such a stance, Netanyahu could arrange to make sure that happened. The claims that Assad has used chemical weapons against his own people, however, have been investigated by the UN and found to be without foundation. On 5 May 2013 , Carla del Ponte, UN human rights official, stated the results of the UN's own independent commission on Syria , according to which the use of sarin gas had been done by the rebel forces rather than the Syrian government.
After the second Israeli attack on Damascus , Mr. Erdogan stated that, if the U.S. were to launch an invasion of Syria , Turkey would support it, which amounted to a declaration of war against Syria and was immediately suppressed. He claimed that Syria had long since crossed Obama's “red line” and that Turkey would provide evidence to Obama to substantiate it. Like the claims made by U.S. officials to the Taliban that they would produce proof of Osama bin Laden's involvement in the atrocities of 9/11, however, when they met on 16 May 2013 , no evidence was forthcoming, one more sign that the only justification that has been produced against Assad has been faked and fabricated.
Q: What's your viewpoint regarding the appointment of Qatar 's new Emir and the approach he will adopt with regards to the crisis in Syria ? Will he change the attitude taken by his father and move toward supporting a Syrian-Syrian solution to the crisis in the Arab country?
A: In his most recent interviews, Qatar's new Emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, has affirmed that Qatar continues to support the Syrian National Council, which is the principal group opposing the government of Syria. Under the circumstances, a Syrian-Syrian settlement would surely be preferable, but recent developments suggest that the conflict is in the process of being settled in Assad's favor on the battlefield, where a peace conference would simply ratify the reality on the ground.
During an interview on Turkish television in April, Assad observed that, if the militants were to take over Syria , the consequence could be the destabilization of the Middle East for decades. “If the unrest in Syria leads to the partitioning of the country, or if the terrorist forces take control,” he observed, “the situation will inevitably spill over into neighboring countries and create a domino effect throughout the Middle East and beyond”. While the domino theory in Southeast Asia was a pseudo-justification for U.S. intervention in that case, in the Middle East , Assad may be correct.
Q: The Irish journalist Patrick Cockburn has said that the Western mainstream media portray a distorted and false image of Syria and that he figured out that the reality of Syria today is totally different from what the Western media claim. What's your viewpoint on that? Is this distorted and unrealistic portrayal a prelude for laying the groundwork for a military intervention in Syria ?
A: The stance of hawks such as Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, her successor as Secretary of State, verge on the absurd. Secretary Kerry acquitted himself with honor when, as a returning Vietnam War veteran, he testified to Congress about atrocities being committed there by American forces. Now he wants to side with the Free Syrian Army and the Al-Nusra front, which, according to the UN, has committed more than 300 acts of terrorism and qualifies as a “terrorist organization”. When a Free Syrian Army officer was filmed eating the heart of a dead Syrian soldier, the honor that had formerly been associated with the name of “John Kerry” was tarnished forever.
The U.S. has no warrant or justification for intervention in Syria , which appears to be but one more step in the plan to overthrow seven Arab nations in the next five years that Gen. Wesley Clark learned upon his return to the Pentagon from serving as Supreme Commander, Allied Forces Europe. Syria and Iran are the last stages in that plan, which was formulated in the wake of 9/11 to dismantle the sophisticated Arab states--and eventually Persian Iran--on the basis of the faked and fabricated events of 9/11.
9/11 benefitted Israel overwhelmingly more than any other nation and appear to have its roots in the book, “Terrorism: How the West Can Win”, which Bibi Netanyahu published in 1987, long before there was any apparent reason for the U.S. to become involved in the Middle East. The demise of the Soviet Union in 1990-91 created what the members of PNAC (the Project for the New American Century) was a unique historical opportunity with the U.S. as the sole remaining superpower to create a new American Empire by moving aggressively into the Middle East if only the public would accept it--which they mused might require a “new Pearl Harbor”, which they arranged to come to pass.
Most Americans have no idea that 9/11 was staged to change U.S. foreign policy from one in which the U.S. never attacked any nation that had not attacked it first to that of an aggressor nation as well as to gut the Constitution and created a Department of Homeland Security, because the mass media has long been dominated by U.S. intelligence agencies and no longer informs the American people of transgressions by its own government. But the exposure of massive surveillance of the public's email, phone, financial and medical records by the National Security Agency has become a significant subject of discussion for the first time, extending to our European allies, who are taking a dim view of being spied upon by their most important ally, the United States .
Q: The United States has tacitly and implicitly warned that it may intervene in Syria militarily to dissolve the government of Bashar al-Assad. Will the countries that are supporting Syria against the Western powers and foreign terrorists, like Russia and China, allow an unsanctioned military strike on Syria by the United States and its allies? Will the United States succeed in launching a new war in the region, given its failed experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan ?
A: The Israeli attacks on Syria , which even appear to have involved the use of mini-nukes, appear to have been a colossal blunder. It created an opening for Russia to take measures in support of Syria on both humanitarian grounds and in defense of international law, which neither the U.S. nor Israel respect. Putin even called Netanyahu in Singapore and advised him that Russia would not permit another Israeli attack on Syria . News reports in war zones are inevitably incomplete and often misleading, but the situation now appears to be as follows.
Russia has provided Syria with S-300 (and probably even S-400) anti-missile technology, which appears to be the world's best. Russia has withdrawn its forces and ships at the naval based at Tartus but has positioned a sophisticated spy ship in the vicinity to monitor military developments, which does not signal any weakening of Russian resolve but are appropriate preparations for what may become a nuclear war over Syria.
The Assad forces are making great progress in putting down the artificial uprising, which gained public sympathy because of false flag massacres of villages in Syria, which were blamed on the government but appear to have been committed by mercenaries and others, just as the UN itself has concluded that the alleged use of chemical weapons in small quantities appears to have been done, not by the government, but by the rebels. Under these circumstances, U.S. intervention at this stage only complicates a losing proposition for American interests and creates yet one more reason to oppose U.S. involvement in the Middle East .
Kourosh Ziabari is an award-winning Iranian journalist and media correspondent. He writes for Global Research, CounterCurrents.org, Tehran Times, Iran Review and other publications across the world. His articles and interviews have been translated in 10 languages. His website is http://kouroshziabari.com
Comments are moderated