From
the first sudden, and quite dramatic, appearance of the fanatical
Islamic group known as ISIS which was largely unheard of until a year
ago, on the world's stage and which promptly replaced the worn out and
tired al Qaeda as the world's terrorist bogeyman, we suggested that the "straight to beheading YouTube clip" purpose behind the Saudi Arabia-funded Islamic State was
a simple one: use the Jihadists as the vehicle of choice to achieve a
political goal: depose of Syria's president Assad, who for years has
stood in the way of a critical Qatari natural gas pipeline,
one which could dethrone Russia as Europe's dominant - and belligerent -
source of energy, reaching an interim climax with the unsuccessful
Mediterranean Sea military build up of 2013, which nearly resulted in
quasi-world war.
But it's one thing to speculate; it's something entirely different to have hard proof.
And while speculation was rife that just like the CIA-funded al Qaeda had
been used as a facade by the US to achieve its own geopolitical and
national interests over the past two decades, so ISIS was nothing more
than al Qaeda 2.0, there was no actual evidence of just this.
That
may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government
document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows
that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.
According
to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed in Medium, the "leaked document
reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West
intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad,
despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an
‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
According to the newly declassified US document, the
Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct
consequence of the strategy, but described this outcome as a strategic
opportunity to “isolate the Syrian regime.”
And not just that: as we reported last week,
now that ISIS is running around the middle east, cutting people's heads
of in 1080p quality and Hollywood-quality (perhaps literally) video,
the US has a credible justification to sell billions worth of modern,
sophisticated weapons in the region in order to "modernize" and
"replenish" the weapons of such US allies as Saudi Arabia, Israel and
Iraq.
But
that the US military-industrial complex is a winner every time war
breaks out anywhere in the world (usually with the assistance of the
CIA) is clear to everyone by now. What wasn't clear is just how the US
predetermined the current course of events in the middle east.
Now,
thanks to the following declassified report, we have a far better
understanding of not only how current events in the middle east came to
be, but what America's puppermaster role leading up to it all, was.
From Nafeez Ahmed: Secret
Pentagon report reveals West saw ISIS as strategic asset Anti-ISIS
coalition knowingly sponsored violent extremists to ‘isolate’ Assad,
rollback ‘Shia expansion', originally posted in Medium.
Hypocrisy
The
revelations contradict the official line of Western government on their
policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret Western
support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning threat
of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on
civil liberties at home.
The
DIA provides military intelligence in support of planners, policymakers
and operations for the US Department of Defense and intelligence
community.
So
far, media reporting has focused on the evidence that the Obama
administration knew of arms supplies from a Libyan terrorist stronghold
to rebels in Syria.
Some outlets have reported the US intelligence community’s internal prediction of the rise of ISIS. Yet
none have accurately acknowledged the disturbing details exposing how
the West knowingly fostered a sectarian, al-Qaeda-driven rebellion in
Syria.
Charles Shoebridge, a former British Army and Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism intelligence officer, said:
“Given
the political leanings of the organisation that obtained these
documents, it’s unsurprising that the main emphasis given to them thus
far has been an attempt to embarrass Hilary Clinton regarding what was
known about the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012. However,
the documents also contain far less publicized revelations that raise
vitally important questions of the West’s governments and media in their
support of Syria’s rebellion.”
The West’s Islamists
The newly declassified DIA document from
2012 confirms that the main component of the anti-Assad rebel forces by
this time comprised Islamist insurgents affiliated to groups that would
lead to the emergence of ISIS. Despite this, these groups were to
continue receiving support from Western militaries and their regional
allies.
Noting that “the
Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are
the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria,” the document states
that “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition,” while Russia, China and Iran “support the [Assad] regime.”
The
7-page DIA document states that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), the precursor
to the ‘Islamic State in Iraq,’ (ISI) which became the ‘Islamic State in
Iraq and Syria,’ “supported the Syrian opposition from the beginning,
both ideologically and through the media.”
The
formerly secret Pentagon report notes that the “rise of the insurgency
in Syria” has increasingly taken a “sectarian direction,” attracting
diverse support from Sunni “religious and tribal powers” across the
region.
In a section titled ‘The Future Assumptions of the Crisis,’ the
DIA report predicts that while Assad’s regime will survive, retaining
control over Syrian territory, the crisis will continue to escalate
“into proxy war.”
The
document also recommends the creation of “safe havens under
international sheltering, similar to what transpired in Libya when
Benghazi was chosen as the command centre for the temporary government.”
In Libya, anti-Gaddafi rebels, most of whom were al-Qaeda affiliated militias, were protected by NATO ‘safe havens’ (aka ‘no fly zones’).
‘Supporting powers want’ ISIS entity
In a strikingly prescient prediction, the Pentagon document explicitly forecasts the probable declaration of “an Islamic State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria.”
Nevertheless,
“Western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey are supporting these
efforts” by Syrian “opposition forces” fighting to “control the eastern
areas (Hasaka and Der Zor), adjacent to Western Iraqi provinces (Mosul
and Anbar)”:
“…
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, which is considered the strategic depth of
the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”
The
secret Pentagon document thus provides extraordinary confirmation that
the US-led coalition currently fighting ISIS, had three years ago
welcomed the emergence of an extremist “Salafist Principality” in the
region as a way to undermine Assad, and block off the strategic expansion of Iran. Crucially, Iraq is labeled as an integral part of this “Shia expansion.”
The
establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, the
DIA document asserts, is “exactly” what the “supporting powers to the
[Syrian] opposition want.” Earlier on, the document repeatedly describes
those “supporting powers” as “the West, Gulf countries, and Turkey.”
Further
on, the document reveals that Pentagon analysts were acutely aware of
the dire risks of this strategy, yet ploughed ahead anyway.
The
establishment of such a “Salafist Principality” in eastern Syria, it
says, would create “the ideal atmosphere for AQI to return to its old
pockets in Mosul and Ramadi.” Last summer, ISIS conquered Mosul in Iraq, and just this month has also taken control of Ramadi.
Such a quasi-state entity will provide:
“…
a renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying the jihad among
Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest of the Sunnis in the Arab world
against what it considers one enemy. ISI could also declare an Islamic
State through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and
Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and
the protection of territory.”
The
2012 DIA document is an Intelligence Information Report (IIR), not a
“finally evaluated intelligence” assessment, but its contents are vetted
before distribution. The report was circulated throughout the US
intelligence community, including to the State Department, Central
Command, the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, among other
agencies.
In response to my questions about the strategy, the
British government simply denied the Pentagon report’s startling
revelations of deliberate Western sponsorship of violent extremists in
Syria. A British Foreign Office spokesperson said:
“AQ
and ISIL are proscribed terrorist organisations. The UK opposes all
forms of terrorism. AQ, ISIL, and their affiliates pose a direct threat
to the UK’s national security. We are part of a military and political
coalition to defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and are working with
international partners to counter the threat from AQ and other terrorist
groups in that region. In Syria we have always supported those moderate
opposition groups who oppose the tyranny of Assad and the brutality of
the extremists.”
The DIA did not respond to request for comment.
Strategic asset for regime-change
Security
analyst Shoebridge, however, who has tracked Western support for
Islamist terrorists in Syria since the beginning of the war, pointed out
that the secret Pentagon intelligence report exposes fatal
contradictions at the heart of official pronunciations:
“Throughout
the early years of the Syria crisis, the US and UK governments, and
almost universally the West’s mainstream media, promoted Syria’s rebels
as moderate, liberal, secular, democratic, and therefore deserving of
the West’s support. Given that these documents wholly undermine this
assessment, it’s significant that the West’s media has now, despite
their immense significance, almost entirely ignored them.”
According
to Brad Hoff, a former US Marine who served during the early years of
the Iraq War and as a 9/11 first responder at the Marine Corps
Headquarters in Battalion Quantico from 2000 to 2004, the just released
Pentagon report for the first time provides stunning affirmation that:
“US
intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the
Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as
an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a US strategic
asset.”
Hoff, who is managing editor of Levant Report —
?an online publication run by Texas-based educators who have direct
experience of the Middle East?—?points out that the DIA document “matter-of-factly”
states that the rise of such an extremist Salafist political entity in
the region offers a “tool for regime change in Syria.”
The
DIA intelligence report shows, he said, that the rise of ISIS only
became possible in the context of the Syrian insurgency?—?“there is no
mention of US troop withdrawal from Iraq as a catalyst for Islamic
State’s rise, which is the contention of innumerable politicians and
pundits.” The report demonstrates that:
“The
establishment of a ‘Salafist Principality’ in Eastern Syria is
‘exactly’ what the external powers supporting the opposition want
(identified as ‘the West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey’) in order to
weaken the Assad government.”
The
rise of a Salafist quasi-state entity that might expand into Iraq, and
fracture that country, was therefore clearly foreseen by US intelligence
as likely?—?but nevertheless strategically useful?—?blowback from the
West’s commitment to “isolating Syria.”
Complicity
Critics
of the US-led strategy in the region have repeatedly raised questions
about the role of coalition allies in intentionally providing extensive
support to Islamist terrorist groups in the drive to destabilize the
Assad regime in Syria.
The
conventional wisdom is that the US government did not retain sufficient
oversight on the funding to anti-Assad rebel groups, which was supposed
to be monitored and vetted to ensure that only ‘moderate’ groups were
supported.
However,
the newly declassified Pentagon report proves unambiguously that years
before ISIS launched its concerted offensive against Iraq, the US
intelligence community was fully aware that Islamist militants
constituted the core of Syria’s sectarian insurgency.
Despite
that, the Pentagon continued to support the Islamist insurgency, even
while anticipating the probability that doing so would establish an
extremist Salafi stronghold in Syria and Iraq.
As
Shoebridge told me, “The documents show that not only did the US
government at the latest by August 2012 know the true extremist nature
and likely outcome of Syria’s rebellion”?—?namely, the emergence of
ISIS?—?“but that this was considered an advantage for US foreign policy.
This also suggests a decision to spend years in an effort to
deliberately mislead the West’s public, via a compliant media, into
believing that Syria’s rebellion was overwhelmingly ‘moderate.’”
Annie Machon, a former MI5 intelligence officer who blew the whistle in the 1990s on MI6 funding of al-Qaeda to assassinate Libya’s former leader Colonel Gaddafi, similarly said of the revelations:
“This is no surprise to me. Within individual countries there are always multiple intelligence agencies with competing agendas.”
She
explained that MI6’s Libya operation in 1996, which resulted in the
deaths of innocent people, “happened at precisely the time when MI5 was
setting up a new section to investigate al-Qaeda.”
This strategy was repeated on a grand scale in the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, said Machon, where the CIA and MI6 were:
“…
supporting the very same Libyan groups, resulting in a failed state,
mass murder, displacement and anarchy. So the idea that elements of the
American military-security complex have enabled the development of ISIS
after their failed attempt to get NATO to once again ‘intervene’ is part
of an established pattern. And they remain indifferent to the sheer
scale of human suffering that is unleashed as a result of such
game-playing.”
Divide and rule
Several
US government officials have conceded that their closest allies in the
anti-ISIS coalition were funding violent extremist Islamist groups that
became integral to ISIS.
US Vice President Joe Biden, for instance, admitted last
year that Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Turkey had funneled hundreds
of millions of dollars to Islamist rebels in Syria that metamorphosed
into ISIS.
But he did not admit what this internal Pentagon document demonstrates?—?that the entire covert strategy was sanctioned and supervisedby the US, Britain, France, Israel and other Western powers.
The strategy appears to fit a policy scenario identified by a recent US Army-commissioned RAND Corp report.
The
report, published four years before the DIA document, called for the US
“to capitalise on the Shia-Sunni conflict by taking the side of the
conservative Sunni regimes in a decisive fashion and working with them
against all Shiite empowerment movements in the Muslim world.”
The
US would need to contain “Iranian power and influence” in the Gulf by
“shoring up the traditional Sunni regimes in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and
Pakistan.” Simultaneously, the US must maintain “a strong strategic
relationship with the Iraqi Shiite government” despite its Iran
alliance.
The RAND report confirmed that
the “divide and rule” strategy was already being deployed “to create
divisions in the jihadist camp. Today in Iraq such a strategy is being
used at the tactical level.”
The
report observed that the US was forming “temporary alliances” with
al-Qaeda affiliated “nationalist insurgent groups” that have fought the
US for four years in the form of “weapons and cash.” Although these
nationalists “have cooperated with al-Qaeda against US forces,” they are
now being supported to exploit “the common threat that al-Qaeda now
poses to both parties.”
The
2012 DIA document, however, further shows that while sponsoring
purportedly former al-Qaeda insurgents in Iraq to counter al-Qaeda,Western governments were simultaneously arming al-Qaeda insurgents in Syria.
The
revelation from an internal US intelligence document that the very
US-led coalition supposedly fighting ‘Islamic State’ today, knowingly
created ISIS in the first place, raises troubling questions about recent
government efforts to justify the expansion of state anti-terror
powers.
In
the wake of the rise of ISIS, intrusive new measures to combat
extremism including mass surveillance, the Orwellian ‘prevent duty’ and
even plans to enable government censorship of broadcasters, are being
pursued on both sides of the Atlantic, much of which disproportionately
targets activists, journalists and ethnic minorities, especially
Muslims.
Yet the new Pentagon report reveals that, contrary to Western government claims, the
primary cause of the threat comes from their own deeply misguided
policies of secretly sponsoring Islamist terrorism for dubious
geopolitical purposes.
