Syrian Conflict: The Price of Defying the West

Haaretz piece reveals Syrian conflict is direct punitive result of Assad defying West, obstructing US-Israeli attack on Iran.

 March 28, 2013 (LD) – Haaretz has recently published an exceptionally revealing article, confirming that the Brooking Institution’s “Which Path to Persia?” report – a plan for the undermining and destruction of Iran – had indeed been set in motion, and that the current Syrian conflict is a direct result of Syria and Iran defying the West and disrupting what was to be a coup de grâce delivered to Tehran.

The article is titled, “Assad’s Israeli friend,” appears at first to be a ham-handed attempt to portray Syrian President Bashar Al Assad as somehow allied with Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Instead, it actually reveals that Israel had attempted to execute verbatim, the strategies prescribed in the Brookings Institution’s “Which Path to Persia?” report, where Israel was to lure Syria away from Iran ahead of a US-Israeli strike and subsequent war with Tehran.

Syria obviously did not fall into the trap, and as a result, has been plunged into a destructive, spiteful war of proxy aggression by the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia and their regional allies.

The Haaretz piece states specifically: 

In moving closer to Assad, Netanyahu had a number of motives. First, he wanted to put some space between Syria and Iran,
in the hope that Damascus would stand aside in the event of an Israeli
strike against Iranian nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordow.

Israel’s loss of its alliances with Turkey and later with Egypt,
compounded by apprehension about a deteriorating security situation in
the south, pushed Jerusalem into buying quiet on its northern borders.

third motive was to weaken Hezbollah, while the fourth was to address
concerns that the Syrian rebels were in fact Al-Qaida operatives and
that the fall of Assad’s regime would turn Syria into a hostile Islamic

Of course, while Haaretz admits that the so-called “Syrian rebels” are in fact vicious Al Qaeda terrorists with no intention of instituting anything resembling “freedom” or “democracy” in Syria, contrary to the West’s own long-peddled narrative, Israel is in fact one of three primary co-conspirators in raising the terrorist army in the first place.

In Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s 2007 New Yorker article,  “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” Israel was implicated directly in an insidious conspiracy to funnel aid and arms to sectarian extremists in a bid to topple Iran and its regional allies: 

In the past year, the Saudis, the Israelis, and the
Bush Administration have developed a series of informal understandings
about their new strategic direction. At least four main elements were
involved, the U.S. government consultant told me. First, Israel would be
assured that its security was paramount and that Washington and Saudi
Arabia and other Sunni states shared its concern about Iran. 

Second, the Saudis would urge Hamas, the Islamist Palestinian party
that has received support from Iran, to curtail its anti-Israeli
aggression and to begin serious talks about sharing leadership with
Fatah, the more secular Palestinian group. (In February, the Saudis
brokered a deal at Mecca between the two factions. However, Israel and
the U.S. have expressed dissatisfaction with the terms.)

The third component was that the Bush Administration would work
directly with Sunni nations to counteract Shiite ascendance in the

Fourth, the Saudi government, with Washington’s approval, would
provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President
Bashir Assad, of Syria. The Israelis believe that putting such pressure
on the Assad government will make it more conciliatory and open to
negotiations. Syria is a major conduit of arms to Hezbollah. The Saudi
government is also at odds with the Syrians over the assassination of
Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese Prime Minister, in Beirut in 2005, for
which it believes the Assad government was responsible. Hariri, a
billionaire Sunni, was closely associated with the Saudi regime and with
Prince Bandar. (A U.N. inquiry strongly suggested that the Syrians were
involved, but offered no direct evidence; there are plans for another
investigation, by an international tribunal.)

The Israeli belief that pressuring Syria would make it more “conciliatory and open to negotiations,” as well as the “motivations” cited by the recent Haaretz piece, are torn straight from Brooking Institution’s 2009 “Which Path to Persia?” report. The report stated specifically: 

“…the Israelis may want to hold off [on striking Iran] until they have a peace deal
with Syria in hand (assuming that Jerusalem believes that one is within
reach), which would help them mitigate blowback from Hizballah and
potentially Hamas. Consequently, they might want Washington to push
hard in mediating between Jerusalem and Damascus.” -page 109 (.pdf)

Which Path to Persia? .pdf


Clearly Syria refused the disingenuous “peace deal” with Israel, unlike its regional neighbors Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar who are now all working in lock step with US-Israeli interests. While these neighbors were spared the sedition and carnage visited upon other Arab nations during the US State Department orchestrated “Arab Spring,” Syria has been hit hardest and longest. The resilience of Syria may have delayed or even shelved Western designs aimed at reasserting hegemony across the Middle East, including delaying indefinitely war with Iran.

Israel’s disingenuous attempts to reproach Syria are only one of several prescribed strategies Brookings called for in their 2009 report that have already come to pass. Another was Brookings’ suggestion to deslist and arm the bizarre terrorist cult, Mujahedeen e-Khalq (MEK). MEK had been listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the US State Department for decades, yet it was still heavily armed, funded, and its operatives even trained on US soil – this despite the group being listed for kidnapping and slaughtering US officers and civilian contractors.

In 2012, the US State Department would finally officially delist MEK, and announce that they would begin funding and arming them in earnest against Iran. The LA Times would report in their September 2012 article, “U.S. to remove Iranian group Mujahedin Khalq from terrorist list,” that:

The small but influential Iranian exile group Mujahedin Khalq will be
removed from the U.S. list of foreign terrorist organizations, a U.S.
official said Friday, following a high-priced lobbying campaign claiming
the controversial group had renounced violence.

The New Yorker and the Uk’s Daily Mailwould each in turn report that MEK was being armed, trained, and directed by the West in terrorist activities against Iran, including the assassination of Iranian scientists.

Image: MEK is just one of many terrorist organizations, that despite being listed by the US State Department
as such, still receives weapons, training, cash, and political support
from the US government. This is a pattern seen repeated in Libya and
most recently in Syria – each case spun and excused with a myriad of
lies wrapped in false, constantly shifting narratives. 


The US’ delisting and arming of MEK proves that the West possesses the political duplicity to hypocritically arm their own “declared” enemies. This double game of condemning terrorist organizations while simultaneously arming and directing them against the West’s enemies goes far in explaining how thousands of tons of weapons NATO and its regional allies have sent to so-called “moderates” in Syria have ended up almost exclusively in the hands of Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise, al-Nusra , which has emerged as the most heavily armed, well funded, most organized militant front in the conflict. 

The Brookings report is not just a piece of paper – it is a documented conspiracy, executed in plain sight by corporate-financier interests that have transcended at least two US presidencies in their latest campaign against Iran, Syria, and the wider Middle East. Haaretz may hope that people quickly read the article and conclude that Israel is somehow backing the Syrian state, never realizing what is being reported is instead a disingenuous “peace deal” meant to lure in, then fatally betray Syria just as was done to Libya. 

Haaretz also hope readers do not realize the obvious – that Syria refused these insidious advances by the West which lead chronologically to the 2011 “uprising,” that Haaretz itself now admits is the work of terrorists, not “freedom fighters,” and that the New Yorker in 2007 revealed as being engineered by the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel itself.

It is clear that Syria is being punished, divided, and destroyed for obstructing Western designs against Iran.  It is also clear that those forces fighting inside Syria against the Syrian people and their government, are aiding and abetting foreign aggression and what is essentially an attempt by Western interests to recolonize the Arab World. As mortars fired by NATO’s proxy forces, aimed at Damascus University, claim another 10-15 innocent lives, the public must be aware of the premeditated, punitive nature of the unhinged atrocities now being committed by these “rebels.”