The confederal and autonomous zones of Syria - Master Plan by the U.S.

In June 2015 Brookings Institution released a  paper titled Deconstructing Syria: Towards a regionalized strategy for a confederal country that detailed the policy that the U.S. should take in solving the Syrian crises that was unsurprisingly fomented by them. In this short post I will look at some of the key actions that was suggested and see whether they are being played out today.

In the introduction to the paper it mentions the overall strategy being:

The new approach would seek to break the problem down in a number of localized components of the country, pursuing regional stopgap solutions while envisioning ultimately a more confederal Syria made up of autonomous zones rather than being ruled by a strong central government. It also proposes a path to an intensified train and equip program. Once that program had generated a critical mass of fighters in training locations abroad, it would move to a next stage. Coupled with a U.S. willingness, in collaboration with regional partners, to help defend local safe areas using American airpower as well as special forces support once circumstances are conducive, the Syrian opposition fighters would then establish safe zones in Syria that they would seek to expand and solidify.

At the time, this sort of solution seemed far fetched and ambitious, but we can see today that with the help of Russia, and "U.S. willingness" to this, they can indeed target those factions unfavourable to a permanent solution for Syria after Assad is deposed. It also serves in segregating the Islamic world further by smaller nations already divided on lines in the sand, to a more aggressive sectarian division that is not only based on culture, colour or language but on fundamental religious values and war.

The paper goes on to mention how the confederal arrangement for Syria could be merged using Kurdish region and Jordan:

The strategy would begin by establishing one or two zones in relatively promising locations, such as the Kurdish northeast and perhaps in the country’s south near Jordan, to see how well the concept could work and how fast momentum could be built up. Over time, more might be created, if possible. Ultimately, and ideally, some of the safe zones might merge together as key elements in a future confederal arrangement for the Syrian state.

This may not be apparent right now but certainly is leading up to such a scenario after reports from the Institute of Study of War (ISW).

It is clear that without the support of Turkey and Jordan, these autonomous regions cannot be sustained and therefore they both will have a big role to play in dividing Syria, the report suggests:

Creation of these sanctuaries would produce autonomous zones that would never again have to face the prospect of rule by either Assad or ISIL. They would also constitute areas where humanitarian relief could be supplied, schools reopened, and larger opposition fighting forces recruited, trained, and based. U.N. agencies and NGOs would help in the effort to the extent possible, focusing on health, education, and basic economic recovery in the first instance. Governing councils would be formed, more likely by appointment than election, to help international agencies make decisions on key matters relevant to rudimentary governance. Regardless of details, relief could certainly be provided far more effectively than is the case today. At least one such area should be contiguous to Jordan and one to Turkey, and be created in cooperation with Amman and Ankara. These locations would allow secure transportation lines for humanitarian as well as military supplies. They would also provide bases from which to attack ISIL in its strongholds, a mission that western forces could carry out in conjunction with local allies. 

In the end, the Alawites will be given a zone whereby they can control, leaving Russia and Iran a part of the cake so that they take something away from this end-game. 

The ultimate end-game for these zones would not have to be determined in advance. The interim goal might be a confederal Syria, with several highly autonomous zones. One of those zones might be for Alawites. But none could be for ISIL, al-Nusra, or Assad and his inner circle

The report interestingly goes on to say what Russia and Iran get from this plan of action:

This strategy might soften the opposition to the basic approach by Iran and Russia as well—perhaps reducing their inclination to escalate support for Assad and also possibly even enlisting them in a future negotiated deal about Syria’s ultimate future. Indeed, the strategy strikes a balance in its approach to Iran and Russia. It would grant neither a major role. But it would seek to mitigate the risks of escalating rivalry with them by holding out political hope and the prospect of an autonomous region for Alawites (even those previously associated with the Assad regime, as long as they were not from his inner circle). This approach may appeal even more to Moscow and Teheran to the extent that battlefield dynamics go clearly against Assad in a sustained way, as they have been already in the spring of 2015. 4 Damascus and Moscow would be much more likely to support a confederal Syria to the extent they believe that the alternative had probably become the complete overthrow of Assad and his government—and the elimination of meaningful Alawite influence in a future government—or, in a best case, protracted civil war of indefinite duration. 

Is this not the case today? The invisible handshake between America and Russia clearly states that there is an agreement in place. Iran has also become a major player in the region.

It's worth reading the full PDF here: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2015/06/23-syria-strategy-ohanlon/23syriastrategyohanlon.pdf

To those who deny that Maliki retreated from Mosul

If you didn't believe it before you better believe it now. The army did in fact retreat from Mosul at the advance of ISIS. The arguments about the Arab armies being 'cowards' and fleeing from combat are just pure Orientalist propaganda to demean and demotivate the Ummah in its trust and reliance on the military.

If they were not told to retreat by Maliki then there would be no need for an Iraqi parliamentary investigative report that accounts senior officials for the setback in Mosul and Iraq in general after the orders for retreating.

Read this:

Former Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has rejected allegations that he was responsible for the fall of Iraq’s second city, Mosul, to Daesh Takfiri militants last year.

Speaking in a press conference in the Iranian capital Tehran on Monday, Maliki called into question the integrity of a recent report by an Iraqi parliamentary investigative committee, which held him and a number of other senior Iraqi officials accountable for the setback.

Instead, Maliki blamed Turkey and Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) for the fall of Mosul, saying Daesh's takeover took place after the KRG ordered Kurdish fighters to retreat from the conflict zone.

Maliki, who is currently serving as Iraq’s vice president, further stated that the Iraqi army and police also withdrew from the capital of Nineveh province, leaving Shia fighters alone in their battle against Takfiris.

Lawmakers affiliated with Maliki’s party in the Iraqi parliament threatened to resign if the committee refuses to remove the name of the country’s former premier from its report.

Mosul file to be referred to judiciary  

Maliki's remarks came hours after Iraqi lawmakers voted to refer the parliamentary report to the judiciary.

Salim al-Juburi, the Iraqi parliament speaker

"None of the names mentioned in this report were deleted, and all of them will be sent to the judiciary. An investigation and follow up and accounting of all those who caused the fall of Mosul will be carried out," Iraqi speaker of parliament Salim al-Juburi said.

The report is the first official document citing top political figures and military commanders, allegedly responsible for the fall of Mosul.

Other former senior figures include acting Defense Minister Saadun al-Dulaimi, former Army Chief of Staff Babaker Zebari and his deputy Aboud Qanbar, Ground Forces Commander Ali Ghaidan, Nineveh operations command chief Mahdi al-Gharawi and the province's governor, Atheel al-Nujaifi.

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/17/425140/Iraq-Daesh-Mosul-Maliki

Turkey’s Erdogan says he is ‘concerned’ about Islam

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/01/422842/Turkey-Erdogan-ISIL-concerned-about-Islam

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has sought to link his country’s recent military campaign against targets in Syria and Iraq to “concerns” about Islam, saying the image of Islam is being damaged by violence perpetrated at the hands of Takfiri terrorist groups.

The Turkish president, who has faced mounting criticism over the recently launched military campaign, defended the ongoing attacks against purported ISIL targets in northern Syria and the positions of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in Iraq, saying Ankara is faced with a serious threat from Takfiri groups.

“Our only concern is Islam, Islam, Islam,” Erdogan said in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta – where he is on an official visit – on Friday.

Critics say the Turkish military campaign, which began two weeks ago, is in fact focused mainly on Kurdish targets rather than ISIL positions. Turkey had been publicly indifferent to the atrocities committed by ISIL in Syria and Iraq before certain recent developments that provided an opportunity for Ankara to begin targeting Kurds, a population Turkey considers as its number one enemy. Turkey has officially declared that it will oppose the establishment of a Kurdish state along its southern borders.

Elaborating on his “concerns” about Islam, Erdogan said the crucial problem facing the Muslim world is “sectarian divisions,” which he claimed is exploited by the terrorists.

“Turkey makes no distinction between Sunni and Shia members of Islam and does not follow a policy based on sectarian divisions,” Erdogan said.

He lashed out at the terror groups for killing people in the name of Islam, saying the religion forbids any such “unjust killings” and considers them “equivalent to killing all of humanity.”

Turkish links to ISIS

It is clear that in order to entice Turkey into playing an active role for the West on the War on Islam they have to incentivize it. One way the US could be doing this is to aid ISIS in capturing oil fields and selling this on the black market mainly to Turkish officials that will keep the Turkish economy intact, considering the West wish to portray Turkey as an economic model for other nations.

This article makes the links:

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/27/422063/Turkey-ISIL-Syria-oil-Abu-Sayyaf

Western official confirms Turkey-ISIL secret oil business

A Western official has confirmed the existence of clandestine business links between Takfiri ISIL terrorists and the Turkish government.

In a report published on Sunday, The Guardian quoted an unnamed senior Western official as saying that evidence on direct dealings between Turkish officials and ranking ISIL members was “undeniable.”

According to the Western official, the documents on the undeclared alliance were obtained following a US raid on the compound of the key ISIL figure, Abu Sayyaf, in Syria in May, which led to his killing.

“There are hundreds of flash drives and documents that were seized there,” the official said. “They are being analyzed at the moment, but the links are already so clear that they could end up having profound policy implications for the relationship between us and Ankara.”

The ISIL operative was responsible for smuggling oil from fields in eastern Syria. The oil then found its way into the black market to become the main driver of revenues for ISIL, with Turkish buyers as its main clients.

Turkey has been facing criticism for facilitating militants’ border crossings to join ISIL in Syria, which has been grappling with foreign-backed militancy since March 2011. Ankara has also been criticized for providing assistance to Takfiri terrorists waging war in the Arab country.

The report comes against the backdrop of airstrikes conducted by the Turkish military against targets controlled by Takfiri ISIL terrorists inside Syria as well as the positions of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in northern Iraq.

Washington has Found the Solution: “Let’s Divide Iraq as We Did in Yugoslavia!”

Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/washington-has-found-the-solution-let-s-divide-iraq-as-we-did-in-yugoslavia/2174

Editor’s note:

This article by Michel Collon was first published by Global Research in December 2003. It outlines with foresight the strategy of the US, through covert intelligence operations, of breaking up Iraq into a number of separate states. The unleashing of a civil war with a view to deliberately breaking up Iraq was part of the US war agenda from the outset.

They have found the solution! Divide Iraq into three mini-states and then pit them against one another. Does that remind you of something else? Oh, yes! It’s not the first time something like this happened….

The New York Times published an editorial on November 25, 2003 carrying Leslie Gelb’s by-line. He’s an influential man who, until recently, presided over the very important Council on Foreign Relations, a think tank that brings together the CIA, the secretary of state and big shots from U.S. multinational corporations.

Gelb’s plan? Replace Iraq with three mini-states:

“Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south.” The objective? “To put most of its money and troops where they would do the most good quickly — with the Kurds and Shiites. The United States could extricate most of its forces from the so-called Sunni Triangle, north and west of Baghdad…. American officials could then wait for the troublesome and domineering Sunnis, without oil or oil revenues, to moderate their ambitions or suffer the consequences.”

In short, starve the central state around Baghdad because the Sunnis have always spearheaded the resistance to U.S. imperialism.

We denounced this CIA plan, which has been around for some time now, albeit discreetly, in an article that appeared in September 2002. But, to divide Iraq has, in fact, been an old Israeli dream. In 1982, Oded Yinon, an official from the Israeli Foreign Affairs office, wrote: “To dissolve Iraq is even more important for us than dissolving Syria. In the short term, it’s Iraqi power that constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. The Iran-Iraq war tore Iraq apart and provoked its downfall. All manner of inter-Arab conflict help us and accelerate our goal of breaking up Iraq into small, diverse pieces.”

Will you take some ethnic cleansing again? So, Gelb wants to break up Iraq while transforming the north (Kurdish majority) and the south (Shiite majority) into “self-governing regions, with boundaries drawn as closely as possible along ethnic lines.”

But didn’t this method provoke a civil war and a bloodbath in Yugoslavia? Because all the diverse regions in that country contained significant minorities, and partition was impossible without the forced transfer of populations. That is why Berlin, and then Washington, discreetly financed and armed racist extremists, who were nostalgic for World War II. This made civil war almost inevitable because the IMF and the World Bank had plunged Yugoslavia into bankrupt to make it submit to triumphant neo-liberalism after the fall of the Berlin Wall. All of this was carefully concealed from the public.

Just as they are now concealing from the public the fact that all of the peoples of the former Yugoslavia have been plunged into misery and unemployment, which is worse now than it has ever been. Meanwhile, multinational corporations have taken the upper hand in controlling the country’s wealth.

In Iraq too, the three large populations do not reside “each in their own region,” but are, for the most part, intermingled. Furthermore, Gelb knows very well that to start up this strategy in Iraq once again would, in all likelihood, provoke serious “ethnic” conflicts, even maybe a civil war. He cynically announces that the state in the center of Iraq “might punish the substantial minorities left in the center, particularly the large Kurdish and Shiite populations in Baghdad. These minorities must have the time and the wherewithal to organize and make their deals, or go either north or south.” In this way, millions of people would be forced to leave the regions where they have always lived, but Gelb doesn’t find this inconvenient if it permits the U.S. to secure colonial domination. Doesn’t the Yugoslav precedent serve as enough warning? The truth is that, for Gelb, the civil war in Yugoslavia was a great success for the U.S. because it permitted the breakup of a country that resisted multinationals.

Again the Theory of “Ethnically Pure States”! In effect, Gelb openly refers to “a hopeful precedent … Yugoslavia.” Curious, indeed! Weren’t we told that the United States intervened there in order to prevent “ethnic cleansing”? Not at all, he admits : “ethnically pure” states are alright when they serve Washington’s plans.

While extolling “ethnically pure states” (Gelb also speaks of “natural states”!), he criticizes Tito for having regrouped in a united Yugoslavia “highly disparate ethnic groups,” while pretending that Iraq is “an artificial state” for the same reasons; Gelb is resorting to old theories held by the extreme right.

His theory about ethnically pure states is really identical to Hitler’s: “Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer” (one people, one empire, one führer). It is also a theory adopted by Zionists who dream of Israel “purified of Arabs.” In Yugoslavia, it was the theory held by Western protégés, the Croat Tudjman and the Bosnian Muslim Izetbegovic. It was also a theory held by the right-wing Serbian leader, Karadzic. It is strange to find the U.S. extolling theories that it once pretended to fight against!

The truth is that the United States — just as all other colonialists — is for or against ethnically pure states according to whether or not it suits U.S. strategic interests. The only thing that counts is to weaken resistance. Divide in order to conquer. As always. The Britons carefully organized the division of Ireland, India and Pakistan as well as other places in the world. The influential U.S. strategist, Zbigniew Brzezinski, wants to divide Russia into three countries in order to isolate Moscow from oil reserves. The CIA also has its “own plans” to divide Saudi Arabia. In an era when very large economic and political entities are forming around the European Union and the United States, look at how these same Great Powers are organizing the balkanization of certain other states — states that resist them.

The guiding principle of U.S. international policy is that there is no guiding principle. The U.S. can pretend to fight ethnic cleansing one day and then organize it the next. And with complete arbitrariness. In the past, the United States had obliged the Kurds to remain inside the Turkish state which was being led by fascist generals, but today, the U.S. is preparing a Kurdish state, allegedly rooted in the principle of “self-determination” (in reality a puppet state). They are pretending to bring democracy to the world, but in these instances the U.S. is rehabilitating fascist theories about “ethnically pure” states.

The Danger of a Theory that Is Exportable throughout the World The danger of this false theory goes far beyond Iraq and Yugoslavia. Most of the states existing on the planet today are “multinational.” And sensible people consider themselves to be enriched by this mixing of cultures. But if one allows theories of “ethnically pure” states, the USA would have a pretext to break up any “multinational” country that resists it.

Washington, in effect, intends to trample to a greater and greater extent international law and state sovereignty. The U.S. is preparing to do throughout the world what it had begun in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan, which, unfortunately, a majority of Western leftists allowed them to do for the worst reasons. Stop! It is time to assess the disastrous alliance of this Left with the United States in the Yugoslav and Afghan affaires. If anyone wants to resist global war, that is to say the recolonization of the world, it is time to come to the defense of the sovereignty of Third World countries, a principle that is embodied in the UN Charter. This change for the better took place in 1945 and the USA is intent on dismantling it.

Support the Resistance The essence of Gelb’s plan is to plunge Iraq into a long civil war in order to rescue the U.S. colonial occupation and to be able to continue stealing oil. The U.S. will attempt to divide the resistance — which can be found in all of the various populations — by punishing those who would continue to live together and by hypocritically organizing “ethnic cleansing.” The U.S. plan is to divide Iraq by blackmail, while defaming the Sunnis, who have long been at the forefront of resistance to imperialism.

Will Washington implement Gelb’s plan? What will prevent them from doing so? The fear that an Iraqi Shiite state would join Iran, the most powerful “hostile” army in the Middle East. And the fear that an Iraqi Kurdish state would become a lightning rod for Kurds who want to secede from Turkey, a respected strategic ally that lies on the crossroads of the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East. But if Iraqi resistance continues to grow and unite its diverse currents, including Shiites, then Washington risks missing its chance to implement its plan to break up the country.

The Yugoslav precedent must serve as a solemn warning! Plunging other countries into the same drama is out of the question! In view of the fact that Bush has unleashed new dangers throughout the entire world, and in view of the fact that he is resorting to fascist theories more and more frequently, the only possible answer is to build up a united world front against the policies of the United States and to support the resistance everywhere — and first and foremost, the remarkable Iraqi resistance (the mainstream media have often characterized them as “terrorists”).

The Iraqi resistance is preventing Bush from attacking Iran, Syria, North Korea and Cuba in stride. It shows once again that the United States has never been invincible. Bush is becoming the world’s laughingstock. “Paper tiger” is the classic expression. In this way, the Iraqi resistance offsets the discouragement and the pessimism that had begun to spread in Iraq after the “liberation of Baghdad.” The war is not over; it’s only just beginning. Support the resistance, because we are supporting ourselves.

Translated by Milo Yelesiyevich Also available in French and Spanish michel.collon@skynet.be

In order to Understand Iraq:

- 23 million inhabitants, divided into 3 large groups (no official census and the USA destroyed state and civil registries).

- Shiites: 55 – 60%. Mostly in the south.

- Sunnis: 20 – 25%. Mostly in the center (between Mosul and Baghdad).

- Kurds: 20%. Mostly in the north (significant Kurdish minorities also live in Turkey, Iran, Syria, Russia). The majority of them are Sunni.

- Minorities (5%): 200,000 to 300,000 Turkmen, Assyrians-Chaldeans (Christians), Yezidis, 2.000 Jews….

- But no region is ethnically “pure”:

o At least one million Kurds live outside of Kurdistan (mostly in Baghdad, but also in the south, in Basrah). o At least one million Shiites live in Baghdad. o Some Sunnis live in the south. o Some Arabs live in Kurdistan.

For this reason, dividing up Iraq is impossible without risking a civil war and ethnic cleansing. Especially so in a climate where the U.S. has done everything it could over the past twenty years to stir up conflicts while provoking (i.e., financing) certain minority leaders so that they will favor a breakup. This is exactly how they did things in Yugoslavia.

In short, if the USA is permitted to divide up Iraq, important “minorities” risk being targets throughout the country. Then, Bush is going to say that he is obliged to keep his troops there to “protect” these minorities.

Exactly as in Kosovo, where the U.S. has installed a military base with a landing strip that can accomodate bombers (sic !), after having systematically fanned the flames of the conflict behind the scenes. Today, the USA in Kosovo is protecting KLA criminals and the mafia which practices ethnic cleansing. (see Test-medias, Kosovo questions 2, 5, 7 in our report “Autopsy of Yugoslavia”).

In order to Understand Yugoslavia:

- 21 million inhabitants, divided into 6 republics. According to the official census of 1991: Slovenia (1.9 million), Croatia (4.7), Serbia (9.7), Macedonia (2.0), Montenegro (0.6), Bosnia (4.3).

- No region was ethnically “pure”: substantial minorities resided throughout the country which rendered the country indivisible.

- In Croatia: Serbs (12%).

- In Macedonia: Albanians (21%), Turks (5%), Roma (2%), Serbs (2%).

- In Bosnia: Muslims (43%), Serbs (31%), Croats (17%), Others (7%). All of these groups were mixed together throughout the region.

[GLOBAL RESEARCH EDITORS NOTE: IN IRAQ CIVIL REGISTRIES WERE ALSO DESTROYED BY OCCUPATION FORCES, SEE, Destroying Iraq's Public Records by Saad Kiryakos,http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KIR307A.html ]

Despite the warnings of numerous experts and Western leaders in 1991, Germany, and then the United States, forced the division of the country at the price of a terrible civil war and the forcible displacement of populations of all minorities.

Here also, Berlin and Washington have supported, financed and armed – secretly – separatist leaders and extremists. All this has been carefully hidden from the public.

Al-Baghdadi claims Prophet ordered him to leave Mosul

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/17538-al-baghdadi-claims-prophet-ordered-him-to-leave-mosul

Head of ISIS Abu-Baker Al-Baghdadi has claimed that he dreamt of Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) who asked him to evacuate Mosul, Al-Sharq.com reported yesterday.

He claimed that the Prophet asked him to leave the province with all of his men without fighting.

Local Iraqi sources in Mosul reported that ISIS militias would withdraw from the city upon receiving orders from their leader Al-Baghdadi.

The Kurdish Democratic Party's electronic site reported that "Baghdadi ordered his fighters to withdraw from the city following a dream that he met Prophet Mohammed (pbuh), who ordered him to leave Mosul."

No date was given for the departure.

US plans to establish military base in Kurdistan

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/americas/16887-us-plans-to-establish-military-base-in-kurdistan

The United States is planning to establish a military base in the Iraqi Kurdistan town of Erbil, the regional capital. The intention is to provide logistical support to military aircraft deployed against ISIS positions, it has been report by Anadolu.

A spokesperson for the Peshmerga Ministry, which looks after military affairs for the autonomous Kurdish government, said on Monday that military officials and aircraft will be based in Erbil as soon as construction work is finished. "The aircraft will carry out surveillance," said Helgurt Hikmet, "but those on bombing missions will not take off from the new base." He did not disclose how many aircraft will be based in Erbil, but said that all 60 member states of the coalition fighting ISIS could make use of the new facilities.

The US-led coalition has launched numerous airstrikes against ISIS targets in both Iraq and Syria in recent months.

Hikmet added that military advisors from eight countries are helping to train Peshmerga personnel.