Trump protects al Qaeda in Syria. The Resistance applauds.

Summary: The Black Agenda Report examines one of the great puzzles of US foreign policy. It is never mentioned by our leaders, ignored by journalists, and supported by the Left. It is quite mad.

She asks why we helped overthrow secular women-friendly regimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya – and are now trying to do so in Iran and Syria.

Islamic woman, by Naderbellal1
By Naderbellal1.

Trump Protects Al Qaeda, ‘The Resistance’ Applauds,
Cursing ‘Russians’

By Glen Ford at the Black Agenda Report.
6 August 2018.
Graphics added.

“The so-called ‘resistance is the world’s phoniest ‘left.’”

The “Russians” had to be reinstalled as the “enemy” after Obama made his alliance with Islamist jihad. Trump has now signed on as Protector of the Idlib Caliphate.

The Trump administration, just like the Obama regime, is willing to start World War III to protect the largest al Qaeda outfit in the world from annihilation by the Syrian government and its Russian, Iranian and Lebanese allies. The New York Times and the rest of the corporate media have also chosen sides in the struggle against terror in Syria; they prefer the sons and daughters of Osama bin Laden to the internationally recognized government in Damascus.

The same goes for most of the so-called “resistance” – the world’s phoniest “left,” who direct their righteous anger at the victims of U.S. imperialism and take their political cues from the corporate rag on 42nd Street, oligarch Jeff Bezo’s propaganda sheet in Washington, and Rachel Maddow, the MS-DNC’s 8 Million Dollar Woman.

On September 4, the NY Times spent more than 800 words warning that a Syrian-Russian air offensive against “densely populated,” “rebel-held” Idlib Province could result in a “bloodbath,” without once informing its readers that Idlib Province is almost entirely controlled, militarily and civilly, by al Qaeda, now operating as Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. Donald Trump, who two years ago accused President Obama of having “founded” ISIS, along with Hillary Clinton – an essentially correct assessment – is now all-in with the al Qaeda defense team.

Trump and Syria

Donald Trump is now all-in with the al Qaeda defense team.”

Just in case the al Qaeda/White Helmets don’t get the message – that the U.S. is eager to “retaliate” against Syria for chemical weapons use, no proof required — the White House issued this statement: “Let us be clear. It remains our firm stance that if President Bashar al-Assad chooses to again use chemical weapons, the United States and its allies will respond swiftly and appropriately.”

It is an invitation to al Qaeda to stage another “sarin” attack, as the jihadists did on April 4 of last year, resulting in a U.S. missile strike on a Syrian airbase.

Idlib Province is al Qaeda’s last bastion, the place where the Syrian government has allowed defeated Islamist jihadists to retreat, along with their families, so that battles to-the-last-man could be avoided. But al Qaeda cannot be allowed to continue its de facto “caliphate” in Idlib. Not only is the Syrian government entitled to exercise legal authority over all of its territory, but the U.S. is bound by a unanimous United Nations Security Council Resolution to take all steps necessary to destroy al Qaeda and its off-shoot, ISIS, wherever these terrorists raise their heads.

Instead, Trump is threatening war to protect al Qaeda’s shrunken realm, while the remaining ISIS strongholds in Syria are located within the U.S. military sphere of influence, from which they have been allowed to stage attacks against Syrian Arab Army units and civilians.

“Trump is threatening war to protect al Qaeda’s shrunken realm.”

With Turkey reassessing its position, the only allies the U.S. has on the ground in Syria are the Kurds and al Qaeda/ISIS. That’s why Trump is drawing a defensive line around the de facto caliphate in Idlib Province. An anonymous administration official told the Washington Post’s David Ignatius: “Right now, our job is to help create quagmires [for Russia and the Syrian regime] until we get what we want.” What Washington wants is to prevent the reunification of Syria after seven years of U.S. proxy warfare against that nation, at the cost of possibly half a million lives.

Every single Syrian death in this conflict is, legally, the fault of the aggressors: the United States and its allies, who spent billions to deploy as many as 100,000 jihadists to wage war against a sovereign nation – a crime against peace, the highest crime under international law, for which Obama, Clinton and other ranking U.S. civilian and military officials deserve the most extreme punishment. Donald Trump is now guilty of the same crime – the one that ten Nazis were hanged for at Nuremberg.

“Presidents of both parties have nurtured and protected
the same jihadist terrorists that were blamed for 9/11.”

There would be a horrific political price to pay – an upheaval such as has not been witnessed in the U.S. since the Civil War – if the American people became fully aware of the scope of their leaders’ partnership with al Qaeda. Many suspect the war on terror is phony, or at least incompetently waged, but the fact that presidents of both parties have nurtured and protected the same jihadist terrorists that were blamed for 9/11 is – too awful to contemplate.

The analysts at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) also found it difficult to fathom, back in 2012, why the U.S. and its allies were doing everything possible to set the stage for the creation of an Islamic caliphate in Syria and Iraq. According to a DIA memo declassified in 2015 …

“{For} THE WEST, GULF COUNTRIES, AND TURKEY [WHO] SUPPORT THE [SYRIAN] OPPOSITION… THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SUPPORTING POWERS TO THE OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE SYRIAN REGIME…” [caps in the original memo]

ISIS declared its caliphate in 2014. The birth of a “rogue” ISIS – as opposed to the more compliant al Qaeda army, then called the al-Nusra Front, which was content to fight the Syrian government and forswear a caliphate for the time being – was not necessarily the intention of U.S. war planners. However, the split in al Qaeda should have been seen as inevitable, given the billions of dollars and thousands of tons of arms that were lavished on the Islamist fighters descending on Syria. All al Qaeda members dream of a caliphate – it is only a question of timing.

There would be a horrific political price to pay if the American people
became fully aware of the scope of their leader’s partnership with al Qaeda.”

But U.S. planners have even bigger dreams, of global domination. And to achieve their imperial aims, the secular, Arab nationalist government in Damascus had to go. This was Barack Obama’s “smart war” – to achieve, with a proxy army of right wing fundamentalist Islamist maniacs, what George Bush could not accomplish with hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops: U.S. military domination of the entire energy-rich region, allowing Washington to strangle China, the up-and-coming superpower, at will.

Bush and Obama lost both wars. Now Trump is digging in his heels to preserve an American military presence in long-suffering Syria, to play for time – to the applause of the phony left, the ridiculous “resistance,” the lying corporate media and the hideously criminal CIA, the architects of the Crime of the Century.

“The New McCarthyite line is that, since the Russians are trying to stir up dissent in the U.S., all dissenters are in league with the Russians.”

Donald Trump is now assuming the role of guardian of al Qaeda’s Idlib caliphate, to replace the diminished ISIS caliphate. He knows that he is aiding and abetting al Qaeda, as he accused Obama of doing, but, What choice does an imperialist have? If Syria is reunified and rebuilt, and its alliance with Iran, Lebanon and Iraq allowed to deepen, then the prospect of Washington derailing China’s New Silk Road evaporates – and with it, the future of U.S. empire. Trump doesn’t want to preside over that, and so he takes up the mission of the predecessor he despises.

The entirety of the corporate media are committed to their role in the mission. They must pull off the Deception of the Century, to cover up the Crime of the Century. Since the U.S. is so deeply enmeshed with Islamist fighters in Syria, the jihadist terrorists have lost their value as the “generational,” existential threat to America. The “Russians” have been drafted – capitalist oligarchs and all – to resume their historic place on the hit/hate list.

Having failed to come up with proof of “collusion” between Wikileaks, Donald Trump, and the Russian government to filch Hillary Clinton campaign emails – because it didn’t happen – the New McCarthyite line is that, since the Russians are trying to stir up dissent in the U.S., all dissenters are in league with the Russians. The “resistance” is fine with that, which shows they are frauds, allies of a corporate multicultural fascism that is vying for domestic hegemony with an older, white supremacy-based fascism.

The only U.S. political force that cannot be assimilated by either of these fascisms, is the Black polity, which yearns for self-determination. But, that won’t stop the Black Misleadership Class from trying to find its niche in the fascist corporate order of endless austerity and war, and to blame Russians for rich white Americans’ crimes. For the Black misleaders, opportunism is always in season.

——————————–

Glen Ford

About the author

Glen Ford’s first full-time broadcast news job was at James Brown’s Augusta, Georgia radio station WRDW, in 1970. Later he worked as a newsperson at four other stations. At them he created his first radio syndication, a half-hour weekly news magazine called “Black World Report.” In 1974, Ford joined the Mutual Black Network, where he served as Washington Bureau Chief while also producing a daily radio commentary.

In 1977, Ford produced and hosted “America’s Black Forum” (ABF), the first nationally syndicated Black news interview program on commercial television. For the next four years, the program generated national and international headlines nearly every week. Never before – and never since – had a Black news entity commanded the weekly attention of the news services (AP, UPI, Reuters, Agence France-Presse – even Tass, the Soviet news agency) and the broadcast networks.

While still host and co-owner of ABF, Ford in 1979 created “Black Agenda Reports,” which provided five programs each day on Black Women, History, Business, Sports and Entertainment to 66 radio stations. The syndication produced more short-form programming than the two existing Black radio networks, combined.

Ford also produced the McDonald’s-sponsored radio series “Black History Through Music,” aired on 50 stations, nationwide.

In 1987, Ford launched “Rap It Up,” the first nationally syndicated Hip Hop music show, broadcast on 65 radio stations. During its six years of operations, “Rap It Up” allowed Ford to play an important role in the maturation of a new African American musical genre. He organized three national rap music conventions, and wrote the Hip Hop column for Jack The Rapper’s Black radio trade magazine.

Ford co-founded Black Commentator in 2002. The weekly journal quickly became the most influential Black political site on the Net. In October, 2006, Ford and the entire writing team left BC to launch Black Agenda Report (BAR).

In addition to his broadcast and Internet experience, Glen Ford was national political columnist for Encore American & Worldwide News magazine; founded Africana Policies magazine, and authored The Big Lie: Analysis of U.S. Press Coverage of the Grenada Invasion (1985).

Ford was a founding member of the Washington chapter of the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ); executive board member of the National Alliance of Third World Journalists (NATWJ); media specialist for the National Minority Purchasing Council; and has spoken at scores of colleges and universities.  {From BAR’s About page, slightly edited.}

See his tweets, and his articles at the BAR and at Common Dreams.

Black Agenda Report

About the Black Agenda Report

Founded in 2006, Black Agenda Report is your source for news, commentary and analysis from the black left since 2006. Find their weekly Black Agenda Radio program on Soundcloud, iTunes, or Stitcher.

Their “About” page gives (impressive) bios of their key staff. Also see their Twitter feed. Google suppresses Black Agenda Report in search results. Subscribing to their email updates is the only guaranteed way to see them.

For More Information

Ideas! For shopping ideas see my recommended books and films at Amazon.

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about Syria, about al Qaeda, and especially these…

  1. Another rush to war! This time in Syria.
  2. Secrets about our attack on Syria & Russia to help jihadists.
  3. Ignore the propaganda. See the world through clear eyes.
  4. Big news about Syria. It’s news for proles!

17 thoughts on “Trump protects al Qaeda in Syria. The Resistance applauds.

  1. > On September 4, the NY Times spent more than 800 words warning that a Syrian-Russian air offensive against “densely populated,” “rebel-held” Idlib Province could result in a “bloodbath,” without once informing its readers that Idlib Province is almost entirely controlled, militarily and civilly, by al Qaeda

    It’s true that al Qaeda controls most of Idlib and that referring to it as ‘rebel held’ is economical with the truth, but it’s also true that an offensive similar to those already waged by Syria & Russia will lead to the loss of many thousand, possibly hundreds of thousands of lives.

    The wider issue, and where the US government is being less than honest, is that the real reason for the policy of the US (and other allied governments) is a concern about the growing regional dominance of Iran and the expansion of Russian influence. It seems clear that Iran more or less controls Iraq, and will almost certainly be in a similar position with Syria in the not to distant future.

    I think Turkey is less of an issue. Erdogan seems determined to completely wreck his countries economy and that will hamstring any foreign ventures save those required to secure the borders and continue to suppress the Kurds.

    The only certainty is that there will be more trouble, first, probably, with Saudi Arabia and allies, then with Israel. It’s the latter that really worries me.

    1. Steve,

      “possibly hundreds of thousands of lives.”

      What’s the basis for that statement? There has been war in the Middle East almost continuously for almost 40 years. What battle for a province has had deaths of “hundreds of thousands.” The Idlib province has an estimated pop of 1.5 million (the insurgents don’t hold the entire area, from what I’ve read). That would be 10%-plus of the population dying.

      That’s a higher percent than in the 1982 Hama massacre, a deliberate punitive punishment of that city by the Army. With western government’s watching, ready to bomb the government on the slightest excuse, that’s unlikely today.

      We need some skepticism about claims by US govt officials make claims. They have a long history of telling outrageous whoppers, including outright lies.

      “It seems clear that Iran more or less controls Iraq, and will almost certainly be in a similar position with Syria in the not to distant future.”

      What is your evidence for these outrageous and bizarre claims?

    2. Current Idlib population estimates vary. UN estimates 2.9m of which ~1m are children. Almost half of those currently in Idlib are refugees from elsewhere in Syria. Of course I can’t predict how the campaign will develop which is why I said *possibly*, thought you’d not get me to argue hard for that level.

      Estimate for the number of combatants in Idlib vary from 3-10k. They have nowhere to go. So the incentive to fight will be strong. I’d imagine that they’re also well dug in.

      Your parallel with Hama is interesting, there’s unlikely to be any significant interference from the west. They’ll be much too worried about denting Russian tin.

      I saw varying estimate for civilian casualties to retake Mosul. 10k-40k as an upper limit. In some respects, Mosul seems to be a better example, similar level of preparedness, similar numbers of combatants. I can’t find figures for the actual population prior to the assault of Mosul, so context on civilian casualties is… difficult.

      As for my other outrageous and bizarre claims…

      In the recent conference to decide the fate of Idlib province, the notable absentee was Syria. Effectively, all the decisions were made by Russia and Iran. It seems fairly clear that Russia has backed Iran as the ‘top dog’ in the middle east. Iran clearly does not get on with Saudi as they both see themselves as potentially dominant in the region and threatened by the other to boot. Hence the proxy war in Yemen. Iran wants Israel gone from the middle east. Assad will remain in charge in Syria for as long as the Russians and Iranians want him there and will be suitably compliant. I’d assume that Syrian territory will be more available to combat forces from Iran. Increasing the chances of a serious confrontation with Israel.

      I see no solutions, no keep-able peace. There are too may people with vested interests, and all of them think that, if they play their cards right, they can come out at a considerable advantage.

    3. Steve,

      (1) I don’t understand what you are saying. Are you admitting that “hundreds of thousands” is a bizarre claim? Most of what you say is irrelevant to that claim (eg, “Estimate for the number of combatants in Idlib vary from 3-10k).

      (2) “Your parallel with Hama is interesting, there’s unlikely to be any significant interference from the west.”

      So you believe western government leaders are kidding in their explicit statements saying the exact opposite? Well, OK then.

      (3) “I saw varying estimate for civilian casualties to retake Mosul. 10k-40k as an upper limit. …Mosul seems to be a better example”

      The upper end of civilian death estimates are almost always exaggerations. A rough estimate of Mosul’s population after 2 years of ISIS rule is 1.5 million. Assuming a high-end estimate for the number of civilian deaths – 30 thousand — means 2% died. One-fifth of the 10%+ number the US govt gives, and you credulously repeat.

      (4) “Effectively, all the decisions were made by Russia and Iran.”

      Supporting outrageous claims by making more outrageous claims.

      (5) The two modes of comments I commonly see are:

      (a) Making up arguments, attributing them to the other party, and giving decisive rebuttals. This is most commonly (not exclusively) used by Leftists. Its their primary mode of debate for climate change (“RCP8.5 is a useful worst-case scenario, and unrealistic.” “You are a denier who doesn’t believe in global warming!”).

      (b) Making up facts. When questioned on those, reply by making up more facts. These are inserted into a blizzard of accurate but irrelevant facts, giving an illusion of rationality. This is most commonly (but not exclusively) used by those on the Right.

      Your comments are a clear example of (b).

  2. Steve, your estimate of the number of fighters in Idlib seems vastly too low. I don’t have great sources to point to, but “consensus” estimates (on places like the /r/syriancivilwar subreddit) suggest that HTS alone has 30K fighters. All-in, a total of 50-70K seems like a reasonable guess to me, and 10K somewhat implausibly low.

    1. Sflcht,

      I agree Steve’s estimate seems to low for ISIS (or whatever the preferred name is today) to control a province. But the larger point is that we have little reliable info about events in Syria. Just info provided by participants in the war. “Truth is the first casualty…”

      What Orwell reported about the civil war in Spain remains true of such conflicts today. From “Looking back on the Spanish War” (1943).

      “Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’.”

      As I have so often written, we need to be more skeptical if we are to have any chance of governing ourselves.

  3. Their “About” page gives (impressive) bios of their key staff. Also see their Twitter feed. Google suppresses Black Agenda Report in search results. Subscribing to their email updates is the only guaranteed way to see them.

    “Black Agenda Report” turns up fine in DuckDuckGo. Everyone should switch search engines. Google searches haven’t given good returns in a long time.

    I feel like the title of the report needlessly narrows the market. It’s a good report, or at least worth reading when I disagree with it. Why say it’s a black report when it’s a report everyone should read? My experience with black culture mostly comes through Biggie Smalls and watching Black Dynamite, so it’s extremely limited. I took a black history class in college run by a black lady who could’ve benefited from conservative ideals which she probably thought were white ideas. Ideas don’t actually have a race. Every report that throws shade on the current globalist order is good for all races.

    1. PRCD,

      I agree on all points.

      As a professional marketing consultant, I have found that few people do marketing well — or are even interested in doing so. People have their own ideas about these things.

    2. Der Maiden,

      It depends on the size of your business, and the industry (eg, those selling tangibles have different needs from those selling intangibles).

    3. Der Maiden,

      That’s more sales than marketing, until you have published enough to have a brand — a name and market identity. There are several good books out there. I suggest skimming a bunch for ideas, then assemble a sales plan that you are excited about trying.

      Selling is a numbers game. Writing as much as car sales. Your odds of making a sale from one contact are low. Repetition allows you to improve your work and presentation, and slowly increases the odds. That’s the process followed by successful authors from long ago thru R. K. Rowling. The quick successes are statistically like being hit by lightning.

  4. It seems as if no matter who the Americans elect the government agenda that is against the interests of the American people keeps chugging along

    1. info,

      That’s the great circle of life. If we don’t work the political machinery, then we can’t whine when others do.

      Somehow we’ve come to believe that citizenship is like being a customer at a restaurant. Go in and order from the menu. Done! No work, no risk of our “lives, fortune, and sacred honor.” It’s the belief of serfs.

      But the machinery bequeathed us by the Founders remains potentially decisive, waiting only our energy to work.

    1. Pgomit,

      “about U.S. support of the Saudi coalition (that evidently includes al Qaeda) that is fighting against the Iran backed coalition in Yemen”

      That’s not what the article says.

      “That’s because the coalition cut secret deals with Al Qaeda fighters, paying some to leave key cities and towns and letting others retreat with weapons, equipment and wads of looted cash, an investigation by The Associated Press has found. Hundreds more were recruited to join the coalition itself. These compromises and alliances have allowed Al Qaeda militants to survive to fight another day”

      This is how 4GWs, or LIC, or non-trin wars (or whatever, choose your label) are fought. Money is often more effective than bombs: bribe opponents to stop fighting or switch sides. This is a commonplace in war throughout history.

      News about our wars is mostly propaganda. DO NOT read it as “news” or assume it is fact. This story was obviously planted by someone who opposes this strategy — which has worked quite well, for those that believe we should be waging these mad wars. Probably someone who believes “kill them all” is a rational strategy, and will not be happy until rivers of blood flow pretty much everywhere.

      That’s not an exaggeration. I documented many of these people, including some who appear as “experts” on TV, during the glory days of our wars in Iraq and Af.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.