Logo Wide

Opinion: Obama Plays While His Chancellor Wages War on Syria

Veteran dissident argues America's interests are served in perpetuating the crisis
Opinion: Obama Plays While His Chancellor Wages War on Syria

Informed American sources close to decision-making centers in Washington have revealed amazing details about President Obama's appraoch to the tragedy in Syria.

 

They have also detailed the position of his senior adviser and the Executive Director of the White House on the right policy on Syria.

 

Obama, who began his term with eloquent speeches about the rights of human beings and the reconciliation between America and the Muslim world, followed what was written on his ipad and the messages he had received on his personal Facebook account during the meetings related to Syria, ignoring what was being said and hardly participating in the drafting of his administration's position towards the Syrian disaster.

 

The position taken by the president on a terrifying humanitarian tragedy finds explanation in the speech of the former Vice President of the National Security Council and current Executive Director of the White House.

 

The summary of his speech is that the conflict in Syria should continue as long as the United States has succeeded in dragging Iran and Hezbollah in to it, and that it is too early to stem their losses. This gives Washington the chance to expand and deepen Iranian-Russian involvement, without forgetting an important fact; it did not cost the U.S. and Israel a penny, and it did not result in the death of one of their soldiers so far. However, the current situation serves their strategic interests in the Arab region, and it puts the keys of its future in their hands.

 

Perhaps one of the merits of the Americans that they do not hide their thoughts and feelings about people and events, and interact with others with recklessness as much as contempt. They  admit from time to time, without equivocation, what they are doing or planning to do.

 

Although they always try to prevent others from seeing the truth of their policies on specific issues, they take the initiative to disclose some of the hidden parts of their policy if there is a need to do so.

 

It is well known that America tried, at the beginning of the Syrian revolution, to show its defense of the rights of the Syrian people and interests.

 

But their latest declarations reveal clearly that their words against the regime are just words, and that the purpose was to waste time and mock the Syrian people. They want to appear to want to topple Assad and achieve democracy, while  limiting their efforts in managing the struggle against Assad as merely a crisis into which it should lure its opponents, settling its accounts using the blood of Syrians.

 

Obama's adviser admits that America's strategic interest is in the continuation of the conflict in Syria, denying the nonsense and absurd talk about the withdrawal of America from the Middle East and its declining role in  the region, leaving it to the Russians and the Iranians. He noted that all the American administration's actions were planned and managed and that America has not achieved its purpose yet. He noted it would be wrong to work to end the crisis before it reaches its objectives regarding Iran, Russia and Hezbollah, al-Maliki and possibly other countries.

 

Where are these confessions when it comes to Geneva and the efforts to hold the conference? Is America playing with the conference as it played with Syrians? Is America really serious in reaching a political solution that satisfies Syrians and ends their tragedy? And if it is serious, why does it waste their time and ours with Geneva while  it could impose a solution within hours, without interacting with the Russians and the Iranians, and without negotiations with a criminal who rejects peace altogether?

 

Finally, will Geneva be an occasion for the perpetuation of a conflict that drains everyone, except the U.S. and Israel, or will Geneva include serious opportunities to curb a revolution demanding a democratic regime forbidden for Israelis, and give the chance for further destruction of the state and the community of Syria?

 

There are many signalling that Washington does not fear the survival of fundamentalism in Syria, because this can push the complex conflicts on it to the limits of madness.

 

Translated and edited by The Syrian Observer

......

Helpful keywords