Washington and ISIS:
The Evidence
By Tim Anderson
March 08, 2015 "ICH"
- "Telesur"
- Reports that US and British aircraft
carrying arms to the Islamic State group –
better known as ISIS - have been shot down
by Iraqi forces have been met with shock and
denial in western countries. Few in the
Middle East doubt that Washington is playing
a ‘double game’ with its proxy armies in
Syria, but some key myths remain important
amongst the significantly more
ignorant Western audiences.
A central myth is that
Washington now arms ‘moderate Syrian
rebels’, to both overthrow the Syrian
Government and supposedly defeat the
‘extremist rebels’. This claim became more
important in 2014, when the rationale of US
aggression against Syria shifted from
‘humanitarian intervention’ to a renewal of
Bush’s ‘war on terror’.
A distinct controversy is
whether the al-Qaida-styled groups
(especially Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS) have
been generated as a sort of organic reaction
to the repeated US interventions, or whether
they are actually paid agents of Washington.
Certainly, prominent ISIS
leaders were held in US prisons. ISIS
leader, Ibrahim al-Badri (aka Abu Bakr
al-Baghdadi) is said to have been held for
between one and two years at Camp Bucca in
Iraq. In 2006, as al-Baghdadi and others
were released, the Bush administration
announced its plan for a 'New Middle East',
a plan which would employ sectarian violence
as part of a process of 'creative
destruction' in the region.
According to Seymour
Hersh's 2007 article, 'The Redirection', the
US would make use of ‘moderate Sunni
states’, not least the Saudis, to ‘contain’
the Shia gains in Iraq brought about by the
2003 US invasion. These ‘moderate Sunni’
forces would carry out clandestine
operations to weaken Iran and Hezbollah, key
enemies of Israel. This brought the Saudis
and Israel closer, as both fear Iran.
While there have been
claims that the ISIS 'caliph' al-Baghdadi is
a CIA or Mossad trained agent, these have
not yet been well backed up. There are
certainly grounds for suspicion, but
independent evidence is important, in the
context of a supposed US 'war' against ISIS.
So
Not least are the
admissions by senior US officials that key
allies support the extremist group. In
September 2014 General Martin Dempsey, head
of the US military, told a Congressional
hearing 'I know major Arab allies who fund
[ISIS]'. Senator Lindsey Graham, of Armed
Services Committee, responded with a
justification, 'They fund them because the
Free Syrian Army couldn’t fight [Syrian
President] Assad, they were trying to beat
Assad'.
The next month, US Vice
President Joe Biden went a step further,
explaining that Turkey, Qatar, the UAE and
Saudi Arabia 'were so determined to take
down Assad … they poured hundreds of
millions of dollars and tens, thousands of
tons of weapons into anyone who would fight
against Assad … [including] al-Nusra and al-
Qaida and extremist elements of jihadis
coming from other parts of the world … [and
then] this outfit called ISIL'. Biden's
admissions sought to exempt the US from this
operation, as though Washington were
innocent of sustained operations carried out
by its key allies. That is simply not
credible.
Washington's relationship
with the Saudis, as a divisive sectarian
force in the region, in particular against
Arab nationalism, goes back to the 1950s,
when Winston Churchill introduced the Saudi
King to President Eisenhower. At that time
Washington wanted to set up the Saudi King
as a rival to President Nasser of Egypt.
More recently, British General Jonathan Shaw
has acknowledged the contribution of Saudi
Arabia’s extremist ideology: 'This is a time
bomb that, under the guise of education.
Wahhabi Salafism is igniting under the world
really. And it is funded by Saudi and Qatari
money', Shaw said.
Other evidence undermines
western attempts to maintain a distinction
between the 'moderate rebels', now openly
armed and trained by the US, and the
extremist groups Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS.
While there has indeed been some rivalry (emphasised
by the London-based, Muslim
Brotherhood-aligned, Syrian Observatory of
Human Rights), the absence of real
ideological difference is best shown by the
cooperation and mergers of groups.
As ISIS came from Iraq in
2013, its Syrian bases have generally
remained in the far eastern part of Syria.
However Jabhat al-Nusra (the official
al-Qaida branch in Syria, from which ISIS
split) has collaborated with Syrian Islamist
groups in western Syria for several years.
The genocidal slogan of the Syrian
Islamists, ‘Christians to Beirut and Alawis
to the Grave’, reported many times in 2011
from the Farouk Brigade, sat well with the
al-Qaida groups. Farouk (once the largest
‘Free Syrian Army’ group) indeed killed and
ethnically cleansed many Christians and
Alawis.
Long term cooperation
between these ‘moderate rebels’ and the
foreign-led Jabhat al-Nusra has been seen
around Daraa in the south, in Homs-Idlib,
along the Turkish border and in and around
Aleppo. The words Jabhat al-Nusra actually
mean 'support front', that is, support for
the Syrian Islamists. Back in December 2012,
as Jabhat al-Nusra was banned in various
countries, 29 of these groups reciprocated
the solidarity in their declaration: 'We are
all Jabhat al-Nusra'.
After the collapse of the
‘Free Syrian Army’ groups, cooperation
between al-Nusra and the newer US and Saudi
backed groups (Dawud, the Islamic Front, the
Syrian Revolutionary Front and Harakat Hazm)
helped draw attention to Israel's support
for al-Nusra, around the occupied Golan
Heights. Since 2013 there have been many
reports of 'rebel' fighters, including those
from al-Nusra, being treated in Israeli
hospitals. Prime Minister Netanyahu even
publicised his visit to wounded ‘rebels’ in
early 2014. That led to a public 'thank you'
from a Turkey-based 'rebel' leader, Mohammed
Badie (February 2014).
The UN peacekeeping force
based in the occupied Golan has reported its
observations of Israel's Defence Forces
'interacting with' al-Nusra fighters at the
border. At the same time, Israeli arms have
been found with the extremist groups, in
both Syria and Iraq. In November 2014
members of the Druze minority in the Golan
protested against Israel's hospital support
for al-Nusra and ISIS fighters. This in turn
led to questions by the Israeli media, as to
whether 'Israel does, in fact, hospitalize
members of al-Nusra and Daesh [ISIS]'. A
military spokesman's reply was hardly a
denial: 'In the past two years the Israel
Defence Forces have been engaged in
humanitarian, life-saving aid to wounded
Syrians, irrespective of their identity.'
The artificial distinction
between 'rebel' and 'extremist' groups is
mocked by multiple reports of large scale
defections and transfer of weapons. In July
2014 one thousand armed men in the Dawud
Brigade defected to ISIS in Raqqa. In
November defections to Jabhat al-Nusra from
the Syrian Revolutionary Front were
reported. In December, Adib Al-Shishakli,
representative at the Gulf Cooperation
Council of the exile ' Syrian National
Coalition', said 'opposition fighters' were
'increasingly joining' ISIS 'for financial
reasons'. In that same month, 'rebels' in
the Israel-backed Golan area were reported
as defecting to ISIS, which had by this time
began to establish a presence in Syria's far
south. Then, in early 2015, three thousand
'moderate rebels' from the US-backed 'Harakat
Hazzm' collapsed into Jabhat al-Nusra,
taking a large stock of US arms including
anti-tank weapons with them.
ISIS already had US
weapons by other means, in both Iraq and
Syria, as reported in July, September and
October 2014. At that time a 'non aggression
pact' was reported in the southern area of
Hajar al-Aswad between 'moderate rebels' and
ISIS, as both recognised a common enemy in
Syria: 'the Nussayri regime', a sectarian
way of referring to supposedly apostate
Muslims. Some reported ISIS had bought
weapons from the 'rebels'.
In December 2014, there
were western media reports of the US covert
supply of heavy weapons to 'Syrian rebels'
from Libya, and of Jabhat al-Nusra getting
anti-tank weapons which had been supplied to
Harakat Hazm. Video posted by al-Nusra
showed these weapons being used to take over
the Syrian military bases, Wadi Deif and
Hamidiyeh, in Idlib province.
With 'major Arab allies'
backing ISIS and substantial collaboration
between US-armed 'moderate rebels' and ISIS,
it is not such a logical stretch to suppose
that the US and 'coalition' flights to ISIS
areas (supposedly to ‘degrade’ the
extremists) might have become covert supply
lines. That is precisely what senior Iraqi
sources began saying, in late 2014 and early
2015.
For example, as reported
by both Iraqi and Iranian media, Iraqi MP
Majid al-Ghraoui said in January that 'an
American aircraft dropped a load of weapons
and equipment to the ISIS group militants at
the area of al-Dour in the province of
Salahuddin'. Photos were published of ISIS
retrieving the weapons. The US admitted the
seizure but said this was a 'mistake'. In
February Iraqi MP Hakem al-Zameli said the
Iraqi army had shot down two British planes
which were carrying weapons to ISIS in al-Anbar
province. Again, photos were published of
the wrecked planes. 'We have discovered
weapons made in the US, European countries
and Israel from the areas liberated from
ISIL’s control in Al-Baqdadi region', al-Zameli
said.
The Al-Ahad news website
quoted Head of Al-Anbar Provincial Council
Khalaf Tarmouz saying that a US plane
supplied the ISIL terrorist organization
with arms and ammunition in Salahuddin
province. Also in February an Iraqi militia
called Al-Hashad Al-Shabi said they had shot
down a US Army helicopter carrying weapons
for the ISIL in the western parts of Al-Baqdadi
region in Al-Anbar province. Again, photos
were published. After that, Iraqi
counter-terrorism forces were reported as
having arrested ‘four foreigners who were
employed as military advisers to the ISIL
fighters’, three of whom were American and
Israeli. So far the western media has
avoided these stories altogether; they are
very damaging to the broader western
narrative.
In Libya, a key US
collaborator in the overthrow of the Gaddafi
government has announced himself the newly
declared head of the 'Islamic State' in
North Africa. Abdel Hakim Belhaj was held in
US prisons for several years, then
'rendered' to Gaddafi's Libya, where he was
wanted for terrorist acts. As former head of
the al-Qaida-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting
Group, then the Tripoli-based 'Libyan Dawn'
group, Belhaj has been defended by
Washington and praised by US Congressmen
John McCain and Lindsey Graham.
Some image softening of
the al-Qaida groups is underway. Jabhat al-Nusra
is reported to be considering cutting ties
to al-Qaida, to help sponsor Qatar boost
their funding. Washington's Foreign Affairs
magazine even published a survey claiming
that ISIS fighters were 'surprisingly
supportive of democracy'. After all the well
published massacres that lacks credibility.
The Syrian Army is
gradually reclaiming Aleppo, despite the
hostile supply lines from Turkey, and
southern Syria, in face of support for the
sectarian groups from Jordan and Israel. The
border with Lebanon is largely under Syrian
Army and Hezbollah control. In the east, the
Syrian Army and its local allies control
most of Hasaka and Deir e-Zour, with a final
campaign against Raqqa yet to come. The
NATO-GCC attempt to overthrow the Syrian
Government has failed.
Yet violent
destabilization persists. Evidence of the
covert relationship between Washington and
ISIS is substantial and helps explain what
Syria's Deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal
Mikdad calls Washington's 'cosmetic war' on
ISIS. The extremist group is a foothold
Washington keeps in the region, weakening
both Syria and Iraq. Their 'war' on ISIS is
ineffective. Studies by Jane's Terrorism and
Insurgent database show that ISIS attacks
and killings in Iraq increased strongly
after US air attacks began. The main on the
ground fighting has been carried out by the
Syrian Army and, more recently, the Iraqi
armed forces with Iranian backing.
All this has been reported
perversely in the western media. The same
channels that celebrate the ISIS killing of
Syrian soldiers also claim the Syrian Army
is 'not fighting ISIS'. This alleged
'unwillingness' was part of the
justification for US bombing inside Syria.
While it is certainly the case that Syrian
priorities have remained in the heavily
populated west, local media reports make it
clear that, since at least the beginning of
2014, the Syrian Arab Army has been the
major force engaged with ISIS in Hasaka,
Raqqa and Deir eZour. A March 2015 Reuters
report does concede that the Syrian Army
recently killed two ISIS commanders
(including Deeb Hedjian al-Otaibi) along
with 24 fighters, at Hamadi Omar.
Closer cooperation between
Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon’s Hezbollah is
anathema to Israel, the Saudis and
Washington, yet it is happening. This is not
a sectarian divide but rather based on some
clear mutual interests, not least putting an
end to sectarian (takfiri) terrorism.
It was only logical that,
in the Iraqi military's recent offensive on
ISIS-held Tikrit, the Iranian military
emerged as Iraq’s main partner. Washington
has been sidelined, causing consternation in
the US media. General Qasem Suleimani, head
of Iran's Quds Force is a leading player in
the Tikrit operation. A decade after
Washington’s ‘creative destruction’ plans,
designed to reduce Iranian influence in
Iraq, an article in Foreign Policy magazine
complains that Iran’s influence is ‘at its
highest point in almost four centuries’.
La nueva Televisión
del Sur C.A