Zoeken in deze blog 🔎🔎

Posts gesorteerd op relevantie tonen voor zoekopdracht Patrick Cockburn. Sorteren op datum Alle posts tonen
Posts gesorteerd op relevantie tonen voor zoekopdracht Patrick Cockburn. Sorteren op datum Alle posts tonen

zondag 22 december 2013

Syrie 294

Patrick Cockburn: US Turns Blind Eye as Saudis Fund Jihadists in Syrian Conflict

Thursday, 19 December 2013 11:18By Amy Goodman and Nermeen ShaikhDemocracy Now! | Video Interview
To discuss the role of foreign powers fueling the ongoing conflict in Syria, we are joined by Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. "It is clearly a proxy war. This might have started off as a popular uprising in Syria, but by now it has four or five different conflicts wrapped into one," Cockburn explains. "You have an opposition, but an opposition that is fragmented and really proxies for foreign powers, notably Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey plays a role." He recently wrote the article, "Mass Murder in the Middle East Is Funded by Our Friends the Saudis: Everyone Knows Where al-Qaida Gets Its Money, But While the Violence is Sectarian, the West Does Nothing." Reporters Without Borders has just revealed at least 10 journalists and 35 citizen-journalists have been killed in Syria in 2013. In addition, another 49 journalists were abducted in Syria — more than the rest of the world combined. Reporters Without Borders blamed the spike in killings and kidnappings on jihadi groups.
TRANSCRIPT:
AMY GOODMAN: We are, though, speaking also with Patrick Cockburn, who’s in London right now, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. If you could take it from there, Patrick, and describe—I mean, you’re talking about the biggest emergency in the U.N.’s history, this crisis, the worst since World War II, as the U.N. is describing it right now. Do you see this as a proxy war? And between what countries, and for what, Patrick?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Oh, it is clearly a proxy war. I mean, this may have started off as a popular uprising in Syria, but by now it has four or five different conflicts wrapped into one, that—and you have an opposition, but an opposition which is fragmented and really proxies for foreign powers, notably Saudi Arabia, Qatar. Turkey plays a role. What has changed recently, since midsummer, is that Saudi Arabia is becoming the main financier for the rebel military groups inside Syria. Qatar is playing a lesser role. And the Saudis are trying to develop a Sunni Islamic force that is against the Assad government in Damascus, but is also against al-Qaeda. But this is, even so, very much a sectarian force, which is already being blamed for sectarian attacks on Christians and Druze and Alawites. There, then, of course, you also have the United States and Britain and France. A recent defector from the Free Syrian Army, who joined the al-Qaeda affiliate, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, said he was continually attending meetings—I don’t know—he didn’t say where, but probably in Turkey—in which always representatives of foreign intelligence services turned up, and at one moment while being presided over by the Saudi deputy defense minister.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Patrick Cockburn, could you explain what exactly happened to the Syrian National Coalition and the Free Syrian Army, the main opposition group that the U.S. and Britain and other countries in the West were backing and hoping would be a legitimate replacement, possibly, in the future to the Assad regime?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, there was always an element of pretense in this, pretending that the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Coalition were—represented Syrians inside the country. It was always very much an outside exile development. And, you know, they never really controlled much on the ground. And what they did control is now very little. That’s—you know, the headquarters was overrun by the Islamic Front, which is a sort of combination of Sunni groups, appears to be backed by Saudi Arabia. So, basically, it’s been a disaster. So these so-called sort of moderate elements don’t—have never had much influence inside Syria and now seem to be sort of almost completely marginalized.
AMY GOODMAN: And the significance of Idris leaving, going over the border into Turkey? Talk about who he is and his role.
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, he’s the general—the former general who was—you know, I used to watch him and wonder how did he have so much time to appear onCNN and so many other programs abroad. It didn’t leave much time to direct military action. But I think it did reflect the fact that he was very much a figure which was useful for Western governments and Western media to promote as the leader of the revolt in Syria. But he was always pretty isolated, though he got a lot of believers outside the country. Now he seems to be on the run, really, between Turkey and Qatar. But there was always—I mean, it’s really pretenses being exposed about these movements and individuals not being representative of the opposition within Syria, and that opposition being far more sectarian, close to al-Qaeda than foreign governments were prepared to admit or foreign media was prepared to admit, even a year ago.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His latest piece is called "Starving in Syria: The Biggest Emergency in the U.N.’s History." He’s also just out of Iraq. We want to find out about the terrible violence there, as well, and talk more about Saudi Arabia’s role—not much discussion of that, at least in the United States—in what’s going on in Syria. We’ll be back with Patrick Cockburn in a minute, and then we’re going to have a debate on the American Studies Association, 5,000 professors. They’ve just passed two-to-one—had a vote to support a boycott against Israel. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh. Our guest is Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His latest piece, "Starving in Syria: The Biggest Emergency in the U.N.’s History." Nermeen?
NERMEEN SHAIKH: We want to ask you, Patrick Cockburn, about Reporters Without Borders, who just released—has just revealed that at least 10 journalists and 35 citizen-journalists have been killed in Syria in 2013. The group said 49 journalists were abducted in Syria, more than the rest of the world combined. In a statement, Reporters Without Borders said, quote, "2013 was a turning point because Jihadi groups began kidnapping and murdering journalists in the so-called 'liberated' zones for the first time since the start of the uprising in 2011." Patrick Cockburn, could you talk about the dangers that journalists confront in Syria? And who is behind the increasing strength of these jihadi groups in Syria?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, it—I mean, over the last year—I’d put it even earlier—it’s been getting more and more dangerous, I think, sort of—in fact, almost impossible these days for foreign journalists to visit rebel-held areas. Some have been picked up, you know, just when they crossed the border. Also very threatening is the fact that some who thought they had protection from local rebel commanders have found that when they come to a checkpoint controlled by the jihadis, by—of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or somebody like that, that it isn’t just they who get kidnapped, but the—some Free Syrian Army commander with them and his men also get kidnapped. So, the old protectors can’t protect themselves, and certainly can’t protect foreign journalists.
Why does it happen? Well, people are after ransom. I mean, a lot of these groups, you know, under these different rubrics of Free Syrian Army or maybe Islamic Front or different—are really sort of part-time bandits. Some would say whole-time bandits. They change their colors depending on who’s supplying them with money. They’re prepared to claim strong religious belief or the opposite, depending on where they can get supplies. But all of these—one of the factors that’s happening has beeb the criminalization of the military forces of the Syrian opposition. And foreign journalists are the victims, Syrian journalists are the victims, and ordinary Syrians are the victims. In some senses, foreign journalists are now in a—having the same dangers inflicted on them that apply for anybody within the rebel areas.
AMY GOODMAN: Last month, Secretary of State John Kerry held talks in Saudi Arabia with King Abdullah. The meeting came amidst reported tensions between the two sides over Syria, Iran and the Israel-Palestine peace talks. At a news conference, Kerry said the United States and Saudi Arabia were in agreement.
SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN KERRY: There is no difference about our mutually agreed-upon objective in Syria. As I have said many times before, Assad has lost all legitimacy, and Assad must go. Nothing that we are doing, with respect to this negotiation, will alter or upset or get in the way of the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia and the relationship in this region.
AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, you’ve also written about the differences, the growing differences between Saudi Arabia and the United States, and you have apiece headlined "Mass Murder in the Middle East Is Funded by Our Friends the Saudis." Can you elaborate on this?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Sure. I find it—well, you know, it is one of the most extraordinary aspects of the turmoil in the Middle East that the Saudi backing for extreme Sunni organizations, for jihadi organizations, isn’t opposed by the U.S. more vigorously. If you would look at the official 9/11 Commission report, it said the main backers for Saudi—for al-Qaeda are private Saudi donors and donors in the other Gulf states, the Sunni Gulf states. Wikipedia released a memorandum from Hillary Clinton, I think in the end of 2009, many years later.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks.
PATRICK COCKBURN: And what did it say? Exactly the same thing. The main backers for al-Qaeda-type organizations of Sunni-organized fanatical jihadi groups is Saudi private donors in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. And, you know, at the moment in Syria, Syria has taken over the funding of militant military groups who, in their own programs, say, "We are Sunni groups." They don’t deny their sectarianism. They only seem to differ from al-Qaeda in that they—al-Qaeda is independent of Saudi Arabia, and these people are dependent on Saudi Arabia. So I think there’s a whole series of Frankenstein monsters both in Syria and in northern Iraq that have been created and supported and aided by private citizens and at times the state in Saudi Arabia, but the U.S. has refused to do anything about this.
It really is absurd to focus on tiny al-Qaeda groups in the hill villages of Yemen without looking at these very dangerous developments in northern Iraq and eastern and northern Syria, where al-Qaeda and its affiliates for the first time control a great swath of territory really from the upper reaches of the Tigris River to the coast of the Mediterranean. This is a very big area. You know, it’s an extraordinary development. Saudi Arabia has played a key role in this development. But there’s been very little reaction in the U.S. or Western Europe or from these many security agencies that are meant to be focusing on al-Qaeda.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Patrick Cockburn, I’d just like to say that the statement by Hillary Clinton was released by WikiLeaks and not Wikipedia. I wanted to ask you, though, why you think the U.S. has been relatively silent on—
PATRICK COCKBURN: Sorry, yeah.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: —on Saudi’s role—on Saudi Arabia’s role. One of the things that you point out is that these Sunni jihadist groups principally target Shias, not only in Iraq, but also in Pakistan and in Syria, and that may in some sense account for U.S. silence. Could you talk about some of the other reasons?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, I think that that’s one of the main reasons, and many of these killings of Shia get very little publicity. And then, Saudi Arabia has, through a distribution of arms contracts, through its money, sort of made itself part of the international establishment, in which normally foreign leaders visiting Saudi Arabia are—don’t bring up these delicate topics and put very little pressure on the Saudis to do anything about it. But, you know, it is one of the—it enables the Saudis to really go on supporting jihadi organizations at the state or private level, in the same way that they were doing in Afghanistan, post-Afghanistan, when they supported the Taliban, before 9/11, after 9/11, during Iraq, after Iraq. There seems no end to it. But it is rather astonishing that there isn’t less reaction from governments and the media in the U.S. and Western Europe.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, what about that, the issue of the media in the United States and how it covers Saudi Arabia?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, well, much of the time it doesn’t really cover Saudi Arabia, and it’s usually rather sort of delicate coverage. Of course, the Saudis don’t make it easy for journalists to have access. But many of the facts about Saudi Arabia’s relationships to al-Qaeda and to Sunni jihadi organizations don’t require any investigation. I mean, you know, they’re admitted. They’re in plain view. And still nothing is done about it.
You know, these are sort of attacks on—drone attacks or other attacks in northern Waziristan against al-Qaeda in Yemen, in Somalia, are really peripheral to the main problem, which is centered in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. And the outcome of the support for these extreme organizations is to be seen in northern Iraq, western Iraq, which is now substantially under the control of al-Qaeda-linked organizations, and across the border in Syria, right the way from the—along the Euphrates River right to Aleppo and to the Mediterranean coast. So, you know, it is extraordinary that al-Qaeda has been the great sort of winner of the conflicts over the last—whenever it is, since 9/11, and they’ve—and managed to make such tremendous gains without much opposition from Washington or London or Paris.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Before we conclude, Patrick Cockburn, I’d like to talk about some of the effects on activists, people who have been opposed to the Assad regime from the beginning of the opposition in 2011. In August, you appeared onDemocracy Now! with the prominent Syrian lawyer, human rights activist and leader of the anti-government protest movement, Razan Zaitouneh. She’s since been reported missing in a rebel-controlled Damascus suburb. Zaitouneh disappeared from her apartment, along with her husband and two other activists, after receiving threats from Islamist groups. Witnesses say Zaitouneh’s apartment was found ransacked, with laptops and other belongings removed. In August on Democracy Now!, Zaitouneh described the carnage following the chemical attack in Ghouta.
RAZAN ZAITOUNEH: We started to visit the medical points in Ghouta to where injured were removed, and we couldn’t believe our eyes. I haven’t seen such death in my whole life. People were lying on the ground in hallways, on roadsides, in hundreds. There haven’t been enough medical staff to treat them.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Patrick Cockburn, that was Razan Zaitouneh speaking onDemocracy Now! in August. She has since been reported missing. Could you talk about what’s been happening to activists in Syria, and also what you see as the prospects for these Geneva II talks in January, given the splintering of all of these groups?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, of course, you know, it’s a degrading of the Syrian revolution, which began as a popular uprising, that—you know, that Razan should have been kidnapped, that some of the most eloquent, the most admired advocates of the uprising, of the opposition, should be targeted and kidnapped, not by the Assad government, but by their opponents, by a group—you know, the group that appears to have done it actually, so far as I know, is funded by Saudi Arabia. I’m not saying the Saudis were involved, but these are the type of groups that have taken over the opposition. And they target the people who are the most sort of eloquent advocates of democracy and human rights within rebel-held areas. So this is an appalling development. I mean, this is true—I mean, it’s true in government-held areas, as well, that human rights activists are also targeted, but it’s—you know, I think it shows that the opposition is imploding, becoming—in some ways, becoming more sectarian in a very vicious way.
I think that the Geneva talks, or wherever they take place now—who is going to be talking? That the Free Syrian Army, is it going to—you know, or the Syrian National Coalition? The groups that have been fostered by the U.S. and the West Europeans now can’t visit Syria. They’re on the run. So, if they turn up, then this will be simply a pretense. They don’t represent anybody. The Assad government will turn up, but are they really prepared to share power? Well, I doubt it. But I don’t think that there’s going to be anybody really with whom they can have substantive discussions. These new groups, both al-Qaeda-linked affiliates and the Saudi-backed groups who are emerging as a powerful force, are both opposed to these talks. So I think these talks are dead on their feet even before they start.
AMY GOODMAN: And finally, you’ve just come out of Iraq. We just have a minute, but, I mean, almost every day in our headlines, the terrible violence in Iraq. Yesterday, 70 people died in a wave of attacks across Iraq—that was Monday—many of them Shia preparing for an annual pilgrimage. The media has almost, you know, wiped Iraq off the map in terms of coverage. But the violence inside is terrible. Can you talk about what you found there?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes. I mean, it’s sort of—it’s getting worse and worse. It’s bombs everywhere, the suicide bombing. The Iraqi security forces is incapable of stopping it. But you have to say also that—how do you stop suicide bombers? The U.S., even when it had substantial forces there, couldn’t do it. What is happening is this increase in sectarianism. And, of course, Iraq is being infected by what is happening in Syria, which has given a great boost to al-Qaeda in Iraq and extreme, fanatical, sectarian organizations that are massacring Shia.
AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, we want to thank you for being with us, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His latest piece headlined "Starving in Syria: The Biggest Emergency in the U.N.’s History." We’ll also link to your piece, "Mass Murder in the Middle East Is Funded by Our Friends the Saudis."
This is Democracy Now! When we come back, a debate. The American Studies Association has just voted on an Israel boycott, two-to-one. The organization is made of about 5,000 professors across the United States. Stay with us.


woensdag 24 september 2014

Syrië 302

TOPICS

GUESTS

Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book isThe Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising. His recent article is titled "Syria Air Strikes: President Obama Undergoes Damascene Conversion as ISIS Forces America to Change Tack."
DONATE →
This is viewer supported news
The U.S.-led bombing of militant targets inside Syria has intensified as Pentagon officials acknowledge the military mission could take years. On Tuesday, U.S. and other coalition forces launched more than 200 strikes on Islamic State targets. The latest round of airstrikes in Syria hit targets near the Turkish border, close to an area where tens of thousands of Kurds have fled to escape from militants tied to the Islamic State group. Activists report the strikes have killed civilians. To discuss the latest news, we are joined by Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent and author of "The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising."

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Pentagon officials are openly acknowledging that the military campaign in Syria and Iraq could take years to succeed. This comes as the latest round of airstrikes in Syria hit targets near the Turkish border close to an area where tens of thousands of Kurds have fled to escape from militants tied to the Islamic State group. On Tuesday, President Obama made his first public remarks about the strikes inside Syria.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: And because of the almost unprecedented effort of this coalition, I think we now have an opportunity to send a very clear message that the world is united, that all of us are committed to making sure that we degrade and ultimately destroy not only ISIL, but also the kinds of extremist ideologies that would lead to so much bloodshed. This is not going to be something that is quick, and it is not something that is going to be easy. It will take time, and it’s not only a military effort.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: President Obama also met on Tuesday with leaders from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates in New York. Despite claims that the strikes targeted only militant sites, some residents of Idlib province in Syria said civilian areas had been hit.
ABU OSSAMAH: [translated] The military headquarters are far from the city, in the mountains. There are no military headquarters inside the city. All the people who were killed today were displaced civilians from Aleppo fearing the bombs of Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president.
AMY GOODMAN: We go now to London, where we’re joined by Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book is called The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising.
Patrick, welcome back to Democracy Now! So, President Obama says we must degrade and destroy the Islamic State. Is this the new line in the sand? Do you see echoes of 2003? Is this going to deal with this violence in the Middle East with this group and the related group, Khorasan?
PATRICK COCKBURN: No, it’s not. I mean, it’s—as he said himself, it’s going to take years. But I don’t think it’s going to work. You know, the first day of bombings like this, or bombardments, are usually the best, and there are pictures on television of large buildings being blown up, and it all looks very effective, but usually the buildings have nobody in them. Remember that this didn’t work when the U.S. had 150,000 soldiers in Iraq in 2006 and 2007, so I doubt if it’s going to work now. It’s going to make it more difficult for the Islamic State to put its gunmen into convoys and launch blitzkrieg attacks on bases and on towns, but otherwise it’s not going to have a decisive effect. And you can see that in Iraq, where they’ve been bombing since the beginning of August, and ISIS, the Islamic State, is still on the offensive.
AMY GOODMAN: Will it have a recruiting effect?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes. I think they’re probably not short of recruits anyway. You know, in Iraq and Syria, you have a vast body of unemployed, bitter young men who will look to the Islamic State as somebody who will employ them, somebody who has—shows religious leadership. So, I don’t think that they’ll have any problem with recruitment.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Patrick Cockburn, one of the things that’s quite striking about what’s occurred in Syria since the strikes began is that they’re targeting a group, Khorasan, which Obama never mentioned. The focus of the administration has consistently been the Islamic State, or ISIS orISIL, but the first that we heard of Khorasan was yesterday. Could you explain who this group is and why it is that they are said to constitute a threat to the United States, an argument that has not been made with as much specificity about ISIS?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think that it is a bit mysterious, this group. One’s a little suspicious that the administration, those who are carrying out the bombing, may want to say to its audience in America that here are people we’re attacking who are about to attack you in the homeland, which ISISdidn’t show much sign of doing. So that might be one reason why this obscure group is suddenly given such publicity.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, didn’t President Obama need this threat to the so-called homeland, that the criticism when he was attacking ISIS was precisely what you just said, while it might be threatening people there and the region overall, that that wasn’t the justification? And again, following up on that question, who is Khorasan? Who is this group that they’re calling the "al-Qaeda all-stars"?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, they remain obscure. And also, al-Qaeda is kind of a back number, you know. For years, the administration has gone on, going on about al-Qaeda core, al-Qaeda central, in the mountains of Pakistan, as if this was an influential group. And they had announced great victories over them. Killing bin Laden was one, but also killing officers of this tiny group also in Yemen. But all the time, a much larger group, larger by factors of several hundred, was growing up in Iraq and Syria, which is the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. So I think they still rather yearn to connect the jihadi movement to the old al-Qaeda, which was pretty small, just had a few camps, and avoid the much more serious question of confronting the Islamic State, which controls an area larger than Britain, with five or six million people in it. So I think it’s diversionary and an attempt really to show that ISIS is a direct threat to the homeland.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, there have even been some reports suggesting that Khorasan is fightingISIS. I don’t know whether that’s accurate, but it says that—there are some reports that say that the leader of Khorasan had been tasked with fighting ISIS in Syria.
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, he’d have his work cut out. You know, you have Jabhat al-Nusra, which is the official affiliate of al-Qaeda central, so-called, which was originally set up by ISIS and then broke away from it. But that’s been on the retreat. It lost the whole of eastern Syria to ISIS over the summer. It has some strength in Idlib province, and then again in the south near the border with Jordan, but otherwise is very much on the back foot. So, I mean, ISIS holds about one-third of Syria and about one-quarter of Iraq, so to try to equate some tiny group that suddenly emerges with ISIS, I think, is to blur what’s really going on.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: I want to turn to comments made by Secretary of State John Kerry. He met with his Iraqi counterpart, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, and Iraqi President Fouad Massoum on Tuesday. Kerry addressed a joint news conference after the meeting.
SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN KERRY: I want to just say a few words about our decision to conduct strikes against ISIL targets in Syria and also against seasoned al-Qaeda operatives in Syria who are known as the Khorasan group. We have been very clear from the beginning: We will not allow geography or borders to prevent us from being able to take action against ISIL, and we will not allow them to have a safe haven where they think they can have sanctuary against accountability. We will hold them responsible for their grotesque atrocities, and we will not allow these terrorists to find a safe haven anywhere. That is President Obama’s resolve. If left unchecked, ISIL is not only a threat to the stability of Iraq and to the region, but it is a threat to countries elsewhere, including here.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: That was Secretary of State John Kerry. Patrick Cockburn, could you respond to what he said? And also, the argument that you’ve made repeatedly in your pieces is that ISIS, both in Syria and Iraq, given the opposition to the regimes in both those places, may be viewed as the lesser of two evils.
PATRICK COCKBURN: By the Sunni community, certainly, it is often regarded as the lesser of two evils. I mean, you know, I have friends in Mosul, which ISIL has controlled for the last three months, and they don’t like ISIS, but they’re truly terrified of the Iraqi army and the Shia militias coming back. The same is true in Syria in towns north of Aleppo that ISIS control and in Raqqa, that they—assuming they’re Sunni. Of course, it’s different if you’re Christian or another religion. If you’re Sunni, then ISIS is difficult to live with, but you stand a better chance of staying alive. And I think that the whole sort of strategy, which has been to try to separate part, at least, of the Sunni community fromISIS by getting the tribes to revolt and so forth, I think, just isn’t going to work. It worked in 2007 in Iraq to a degree, but I don’t think it will work now. ISIS is too big, too violent, and is expecting a stab in the back.
AMY GOODMAN: We have to break, but when we come back, Patrick Cockburn, a couple quick questions. Is the U.S. now working with Syria, the country President Obama wanted to bomb—or, destabilize the government of Syria? Is he now working with that country? And also, what about the allies that the U.S. says they are working with, the Arab countries? What are they doing in these airstrikes? Patrick Cockburn is Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book, The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: "Is It for Freedom," Sara Thomsen, here on Democracy Now!, democracynow.org,The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: As we continue our conversation on the U.S. military strikes in Syria and Iraq, I want to turn to comments made by the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah.
HASSAN NASRALLAH: [translated] We are against American military intervention and international coalition in Syria, whether that action is against the regime, as it was about to happen a year or so ago, or against Islamic State or other. It is a matter of principle. This American administration is not ethically qualified to present itself as a fighter of terrorism or as a leader of an international coalition targeting terrorism. It has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. It has other motivations. This coalition, as Obama declares in all his speeches, is defending American interests.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: That was Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. Patrick Cockburn, could you respond to what he said, and also the suggestion that you’ve made in a recent piece that any prolonged air campaign in Syria by the U.S. and its allies will have to rely on those fighting ISIS on the ground—among them, Hezbollah?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes. I mean, you know, it’s a very messy situation, because there’s no doubt those who are fighting ISIS in Syria are the Syrian army, Hezbollah, the Syrian Kurds, whose parent organization is labeled as a terrorist by the U.S. and European Union. So, if the U.S. and others are bombing ISIS and trying to degrade, as they say, ISIS, they are obviously helping these groups. Also, at a certain point, if there’s a battle between these two groups, between the Syrian army and ISIS, is the U.S. going to not do anything, or is it going to effectively engage on the side of the Syrian government? So this is an extraordinarily messy situation. I think that Hezbollah is clearly very—and the Syrian government, is very suspicious and wary of what is happening, because if the U.S. can unilaterally bomb Syria against ISIS, it could bomb Syria against them. So, they’re worried about the precedent that’s been set, even though they may be pleased that the U.S. is attacking their main enemy.
AMY GOODMAN: And is the U.S. working with President Assad right now, the president of Syria, who President Obama was going to attack last year? We know that they gave them warning, ahead of time, of these bombings.
PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, it becomes sort of—you know, it’s very weird. They keep on saying, "We’re not doing that," but, of course, governments hate announcing a U-turn. But effectively, they have U-turned, because they wanted Assad out. They said this was their priority. Now their priority is getting rid of ISIS, and ISIS is the main enemy of Assad. So, I mean, ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra dominate the Syrian opposition. So, they are effectively assisting Assad in a very significant way, though they don’t want to admit this. Then they say—
AMY GOODMAN: And the Arab countries they are working with right now, that they say—this kind of coalition of the willing that they have—Saudi Arabia and Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Jordan—in fact, what are they doing? Are they engaging in these strikes? Is the U.S. succeeding in getting Saudi Arabia not to fund ISIS?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think so. I think, you know, all the publicity given that these people are joining in—Jordan may have sent some planes—is, I think, to commit them to being against ISIS very publicly and against jihadis in Syria, when in fact, of course, that they played a role, according to all U.S. inquiries, in funding and setting up these jihadi movements over the last 10 years. However, I do think that they’re genuinely frightened of ISIS, because although they may have had a role in establishing it originally, or the circumstances in which it grew, it’s rather a Frankenstein monster that they don’t control, so I think they are genuinely opposed to it for their own reasons.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Do you think it’s possible, Patrick Cockburn, as some reports have suggested, that in focusing exclusively on these extremist groups and militant groups in Syria, and not on the Assad regime, the moderate rebel groups that the U.S. is supporting may actually be weakened?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, these moderate groups are a bit difficult to find on the map. And it’s also a question of how moderate are they. There are supposedly going to be 5,000 moderates that are to go to Saudi Arabia to be trained, after they’ve been vetted to show that they are not jihadis. But, you know, they’re not a significant force. I think there’s a sort of pretense that there’s a third force in Syria which could supposedly fight both the Assad government and ISIS simultaneously, but it doesn’t really exist. It’s a political convenience, but really nothing more.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Medea Benjamin for a moment. On TuesdayDemocracy Now!spoke to her, the founder of CodePink. She questioned the timing of the strikes on Syria.
MEDEA BENJAMIN: Well, isn’t it sad, Amy, that the day that the world should be coming together to say, "How do we address the climate chaos that can really destroy our entire planet?" instead, the eyes will now be on the U.S. bombing campaign in Syria?
AMY GOODMAN: That was Medea Benjamin. Your thoughts, Patrick Cockburn?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think that—I doubt it, really. I think that they were always going to do it, because, as the chief of staff, U.S. chief of staff, said, you know, it was absurd to bomb ISIS in Iraq and not in Syria, since they could just disappear across the border and launch offensives there. Secondly, the sort of ritual murder of U.S. journalists and a British aid worker, obviously they felt they had to respond to that. So, I think that there’s probably a simpler explanation as to why they did it now.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: One of the problems, before we conclude, Patrick Cockburn, has to do with the anxieties that the Sunni population in both Iraq and Syria feel regarding the Shia governments. To what extent is Iraq’s new government, under Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, is less sectarian than Nouri al-Maliki’s?
PATRICK COCKBURN: It’s less sort of vigorously and aggressively sectarian as Maliki’s government was. But, you know, will this trickle down to the front line? If I’m a Sunni young man in some Sunni village or town outside Fallujah or Mosul, and I’m picked up by the army or by Shia militias, what are my chances of staying alive? What are my chances of not being tortured? Unless it affects that, it’s really not going to change the attitude of the Sunni community in Iraq. And I think that the sort of Sunni leaders who have joined this government, they don’t have much clout within their community. They can’t really go back to their own cities or towns in any safety.
AMY GOODMAN: Is President Obama doing just what ISIS asked for—to attack, to engage?
PATRICK COCKBURN: I don’t think he’s necessarily fallen into a trap doing that. It’s difficult to know how far—how sophisticated politically ISIS is. After all, it’s a movement which believes it’s inspired by God. It attributed victories over the summer to a divine intervention on its behalf. So it may have overplayed its hand. On the other hand, it can see the advantage of being the standard-bearer of the Muslims, of the Arabs, against what they will describe as crusader intervention.
AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, if war was not possible, if it was not an option on the table, how could this be resolved diplomatically?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Well, I think, that the sort of tremendously messy situation in Syria should be resolved partly by, let’s say, organizing a truce between the Assad government—not a political solution, but a truce—and the non-ISIS opposition, so they can both effectively oppose ISIS. I think that would have an enormous effect. And it could also be an enormous benefit of people able to go back, the millions of Syrians go back to their cities. I think you have to do things at that level, so that there is an effective on-the-ground opposition to ISIS. I think that this present bombing, it looks good for a few days. In some ways, it cramps the style of the ISIS military attacks, but it’s not really going to change anything very much.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Do you think a truce like that is still possible, given that the airstrikes have begun?
PATRICK COCKBURN: Between the non-ISIS groups and Damascus, the Syrian army, yes, I think it is, because it sort of exists de facto in many areas already, that both the Assad government and the opposition, the non-ISIS opposition, are susceptible to pressure from the U.S., from Iran, from Russia and Saudi Arabia. You’d have to have pressure for this from the outside, but it could be done, definitely.
AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. His new book,The Jihadis Return: ISIS and the New Sunni Uprising.

Frits Barend, de Pleitbezorger van de Genociale Joodse Staat

De beschuldiging van ‘antisemitisme’  en het koesteren van het slachtofferschap, de verheerlijking van massaal geweld, de steun van de overg...