The Syrian Bear Trap

It seemed an unlikely alliance, an unholy matrimony, when Syrian rebel Jihadis and USA joined arms to get rid of embattled Syrian President Bashar Al Assad. Jihadis and USA maintained a tacit alliance, rebels didn’t disturb USA and USA returned the favor by not disturbing them despite clear indications that Al Qaida was behind them. All of that was kept under the table and it seemed that we were back to the good old days of Soviet-Afghan war where jihadis had the blessings of CIA. Jihadi rebels became more effective, car bombings increased, suicide attacks multiplied but NATO and USA remained mostly mum.

All of that now, unfortunately (sarcasm intended ) , is set to change as the most fundamentalist and undoubtedly successful Syrian jihadist group, Jabahat-an-Nusra’s leader Abu Mohammed Al Jawlani has  publically declared allegiance to Ayman Zawahiri’s Al-Qaida, thus placing the organization –literally-at Israel’s doorstep. Al Qaida’s “official” presence is now a cause of headache for both Israel and USA, as it is the very last group on planet Earth that Israel needs nearby. USA formally declared Jabahat-an-Nusra as a terrorist organization last year but didn’t take any action.

For jihadis that are now pouring from Libya, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Tunisia, Palestine, Lebanon, Australia, Chechnya, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Kosovo, Azerbaijan, France, Iraq and Spain etc.  into Syria, it is now a golden opportunity to establish a fundamentalist Islamic state in Syria (as has been their demand) and on cue Al-Qaida’s wing in Iraq, Islamic State in Iraq has announced to merge with Jabahat-an-Nusra to create a caliphate consisting of Iraq and Syria called Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), in the style of the 7^th century Islamic caliphate.

For the Americans and their regional allies, Jabahat-an-Nusra’s formidable fighting force of 5000 men along with undercover operatives and suicide bombers presents a serious challenge to the already fragile security apparatus in the Middle East.

It is now becoming increasingly evident that when the Syrian civil war is over and done with, Jabahat An Nusra would eventually fall out with Free Syria Army (FSA) (endorsed by USA and NATO and the official rebel army in Syria) and with seasoned fighters coming from Iraq and other neighboring battle fields, it would eventually succeed in stopping FSA from gaining further power and quite possibly open the way for bringing the Syrian war into Iraq against the Shiite government over there, led by Nouri Al Maliki. The battlefield of Syria is waiting to be spread all over, the chemical weapons that Assad possesses might fall into very wrong hands.

 

And to support this doom laden conjecture, out came Assad himself giving a dire warning to the western nations that the current support of USA and its allies to Syrian opposition groups will turn Syria into the next Afghanistan where the 1980’s support of jihadis by USA led to the rise of AL Qaeda and Taliban. ‘West will pray a high price’ he exclaimed in a state television interview.

Could, the rise of Alqaeda in Syria trigger western intervention?

Possibly so. 

The US now sensing the danger (again created due to its apparent folly)  has decided to put 200 intelligence, logistics and operations specialists from the Army’s 1st Armored Division in Jordan to help check violence along the Syrian-Jordanian border, help in ‘humanitarian aid supplies’, and plan for potential military strikes inside Syria. Chuck Hagel, the new US Defense Secretary  (highly unpopular with AIPAC) said that military option will be the last resort, but the worsening situation in Syria is showing no signs of betterment and Assad’s forces, despite  the repeated rebel onslaughts have largely withstood their ground with aid from Iran.

Obama is wary and doesn’t want to drag USA into another war which is showing every possible sign of being as costly as the Iraq and Afghanistan misadventures, if USA really decides to physically intervene. 

But the American intervention will only strengthen Jabahat as its branding as a terrorist organization by the US in 2012 only increased its jihadist credentials. Also, it is an established fact that Al-Qaida and its affiliates thrive in violence. Given this scenario, is Al Qaeda using Syria as a bait for US to come into Syria and hence drag the whole region into chaos? 

It’s a theory that another Al Qaeda affiliate, AQAP (Al Qaeda in Arabian Peninsula) is putting into action, as it stated last year that it wanted to drag USA into another “bleeding war”. Could this be the strategy that AL Qaeda is employing in Syria as well? Would USA take the bait? Could this prove to be the same ‘Bear Trap’ that USA had laid for the Soviets in Afghanistan years ago and which Al Qaeda is laying for US? Only time will tell.

Black Contents of a White Memo

Image Courtesy www.boilingfrogspost.com

This is in response to the recent blog on The Express Tribune by the name of, Can the US Government kill American Citizens?

Although I agree with the author on the point that any person found guilty of treason should be punished, I would like to add a few points of my own, and clarify some confusion caused over the White memo.

A brief summary of the White memo is provided below:

1) The White memo lays down the legal justification for targeting persons through drones. US Citizens, who are al Qaeda operational leaders, members and sympathisers, are the intended targets.

2) USA assumes that al Qaeda is continually planning terrorist activities and thus US drones can strike al Qaeda suspects anywhere, any time. Even if the attack was never planned in actuality, nor had any threat appeared, but just on the off chance, US Administration can authorise a drone strike so that any ‘supposed’ threat might be neutralised.

3) If you can’t capture a “suspected” terrorist for questioning and interrogation because you “think” that, your troops might encounter mortal risk, then just carry out a drone strike and save the trouble of interrogation and tedious judicial process.

4) According to the memo, even if there is no evidence that the suspects are an imminent threat, but only believes and suspects that they “might” be an imminent threat, the USA has the authority to strike them whenever and wherever.

5) Without even confirmation from interrogation and just on the suspicion that the suspect has not renounced the terrorist activities, the USA can assassinate him.

6) USA assumes that killing of suspected al Qaeda members before they even become imminent threats is justified because the US Administration thinks so. So, please repose your faith in it and don’t question it.

7) The memo doesn’t define the word ‘imminent’. It doesn’t tell how imminent a threat has to be in order for a drone strike to be called. From the document, one gets an impression that if US officials think that such and such persons will come together to plan something sinister, they become qualified targets.

Dear readers, this is an extraordinary document, the implications of whose contents are horrific.

USA is fighting violence with more extreme violence. The issue is not about killing known terrorists who are US citizens. The issue is about killing “suspected terrorists” about whom the government will not share any information, nor the decisions will be available for judicial review, so that the government is not answerable to judiciary and cannot be held responsible even if the drone strike missed the intended target and killed innocent civilians.

There is a huge difference between killing a suspect and killing a known terrorist.

Yes, those US citizens who are promulgating extremism and threatening the US president must be brought to book, but killing and assassinating before the crime was even committed?

Before they are even brought under trial?

That is just plain barbaric and puts US administration at par with al Qaeda.

Through this memo, one gets the impression that the US government is advocating a ‘shoot first ask questions later’ policy and one has to ask, whom will it benefit?

image courtesy  blogdogcicle.blogspot.com

The first benefactor of this drone war would be al Qaeda itself. Remember, al Qaeda and its allies are fighting not just on the military front but on the ideological front as well. It is a hateful and detestable ideology that won’t be just eliminated by drone strikes but only gain followers due to unjustified American violence.

The second benefactor would be the neo-cons and defence contractors. The neo-cons, thanks to Obama, have just continued George W Bush’s policies without any hindrances and the appointment of Bush era CIA torturer John Brennan proves that.

The defence contractors would benefit because of increased orders for more drones and associated technologies, which would mean more cash rolling in.

Even if we assume that drone attacks have achieved intended military results (corroborated by the near wipe out of top al Qaeda cadre), then do they guarantee that the hateful ideology of al Qaeda would just disappear with it leaders?

Thanks to continuous military adventures and arrogant outreach efforts by USA, al Qaeda’s offshoots have spread far and wide, who act quite independent from the mother organisation and are even more eager to spread destruction.

If the American drone policy remains the same as evident from the White memo, then the issue of Islamic radicalism might never be resolved.

Frankly, I found the White memo as repugnant as Mein Kampf.

Read more by Jamaluddin here or follow him on Twitter @einsjam