Connect with us

Latest

News

Syria’s Two Front War

The war against Syria is being fought both militarily and through propaganda which turns the reality of Syria’s suffering on its head.

Afra'a Dagher

Published

on

3,894 Views

To understand the war in Syria it is important to understand that the Syrian people are having to fight a war on two fronts.

One is the front that gets the media attention.  This is the fighting that goes on in Syria itself.  It is being fought by Gulf Arab paid mercenaries who with the support of the US and its allies pour into Syria through the open borders of neighbouring countries – first and foremost Turkey – to kill innocent people and destroy peaceful life.

The other front is the one being waged against the Syrian people by the Western media.  This is a war of propaganda where the weapons are mass deception, lies and distortion of the truth.

It is a profoundly immoral and reckless war, as devastating in its way as the armed conflict itself.

It is essential to understand that the one front – that of the armed conflict – could not be waged against the Syrian people without the other.  It is the propaganda war that makes the actual war possible.

To take one example, consider the role of Turkey.

Turkey has become the way station for terrorists crossing back and forth into Syria.  What that means is that terrorists not only go to Syria from Turkey.  It means they return to Turkey for rest and supplies and to receive treatment in Turkish hospitals. 

Some years ago, a Turkish nurse – identifying herself only as E.G. – working in a hospital in the Turkish town of Mersin on Turkey’s Mediterranean coast expressed her disgust that Daesh terrorists  – whom she called “head choppers” — are being treated in Turkish hospitals. The Turkish paper “Zaman” exposed this as well.

“Zaman” has been a strong critic of President Erdogan’s.  In March the Turkish authorities seized the paper, closing it down.  CNN Turk reports that a number of other independent media outlets critical of the government are also being closed in Turkey.

“Zaman” showed great courage in exposing the direct role Turkey is playing in supporting  and arming terrorists and smuggling them and their weapons into Syria. By doing so “Zaman” brought down on itself  the wrath of Turkey’s new style “Ottoman Sultan” – President Erdogan – who retaliated by having it closed. 

Where are the protests from Western governments and the Western media about this massive attack on free speech?  When did the media in the West report or investigate the story of Daesh terrorists receiving treatment in Turkish hospitals?   How would the public in the West react if it were told the truth?

Or take the constant drumbeat in the Western media calling for “solutions” to the “crisis” (actually the war of aggression against Syria and its people).

What do these “solutions” actually amount to?  Basically they are nothing more than demands to bomb Syria and its people!

Various justifications are given for doing this.  “Chemical weapons”, even though (as the West of course knows) these weapons were actually used by the terrorists against the Syrian people and army and not the other way round.  Or “the fight against Dash” otherwise known as “The Islamic State in Syria and Iraq” or “the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant” or as “The Islamic State” or simply as “Daesh” or by any number of other names.  This even though Daesh is an entirely Western creation which would never have existed were it not for the Western aggressions against Iraq, Syria and Libya and the destabilisation the West brought about by the fake Western supported “Arab Spring” in Tunisia and Egypt.

The consequence of these “solutions” – ie. of more bombing – were it to happen would not of course be to “solve” the Syrian “crisis”.  On the contrary it would simply make the situation worse, intensifying the aggression and increasing the killing and destruction in Syria even more.

Or take the phantom “Free Syrian Army” so beloved of Western governments and of the Western media.

In Syria fighters call themselves the “Free Syrian Army” or “Islamic state fighters” or Daesh or by any other name that suits them.  There is nothing “magical” about this.  It is just a  kaleidoscope of names intended to cause confusion.  In reality it is always the same people calling themselves by these different names.

The US and its allies of course know this.  They keep up this game of names so that they can go on pretending that there are “moderates” in Syria who they can support in place of the terrorists they actually support, and that these so-called “moderates” are fit to form a transitional government in place of the legitimate Syrian government and can also be persuaded to fight Daesh.  In Syria nobody is fooled by any of this.

The truth is that the Syrian people are being slaughtered by cold-blooded mercenaries.   They may call themselves the “Free Syrian Army,” “Ahrar Al Sham”,  “Ahlo Al Sonna”, “Jaish Al Esalm” or any of a myriad of other names all of which however simply designate factions affiliated with Al-Qaeda’s local franchise the Al Nusra front.  They are however always the same cold-blooded mercenaries pouring into Syria from Turkey paid for the Gulf Arab states to commit aggression upon Syria’s people.

That the US and its allies know all this perfectly well and actually support these people is shown by the way the US, Britain and France recently combined to block a Russian proposal for a UN Security Council Resolution to designate groups affiliated to Jabhat Al-Nusra like Ahrar Al Sham terrorist groups.  Though that of course is exactly what these people are, in order to protect them the Western powers blocked it.   

The result was another massacre in Syria on May 12, 2016 by these self-same so-called “moderate” groups when they took advantage of the so-called ceasefire to storm the village of Zara in southern Hama province and murder its people.  Entire families including women and children and old people were kidnapped and slaughtered.  Zara lies in an area that is supposed to be covered by the ceasefire.  What did Western governments and the Western media have to say about this murderous violation of the ceasefire by the so-called “moderates”?  Nothing!

Or take what is happening to Aleppo – a historic Syrian city and the country’s industrial and commercial capital.   Aleppo is being besieged by Erdogan’s foreign mercenaries to fulfil his “Ottoman dream” of annexing it to Turkey – just as his predecessors seized Iskenderun which was once a Syrian province.

A year ago the so-called “moderate rebels” launched missiles on Armenian residential neighbourhoods in Aleppo.  How did the Western media react?  It followed the line set by Saudi-funded Al Arabia which claimed absurdly that the missiles were launched by the Syrian government who were allegedly targeting children in their schools!  In reality the schools in the Armenian districts were closed that day because of the holiday to celebrate the Orthodox Easter.

Aleppo continues to come under terrorist attack.  The “rebels” control some neighbourhoods like Bani Yazid and use them to launch rockets targeting the rest of the city.  These rockets are unguided and the attacks are indiscriminate inflicting terrible damage on Aleppo and its people.  What do Western governments and Western media say about that?  Again nothing!  However if the Syrian Army bombs these terrorists in their strongholds to stop these rocket attacks the Western media accuses it of bombing its own people. The truth is turned on its head: the victims become the criminals and the criminals the victims.

The bombing and destruction of Aleppo and of most of Syria’s infrastructure, as well as the sanctions imposed on Syria, have made life ever more miserable for the Syrian people, who must suffer poverty and war, with no clear hope for the future.

All this only serves the project of creating a Greater Israel by destroying the one Arab country – Syria – that has led the Arab people’s struggle against Israel.  Even as the war goes on Syria has had to endure more Israeli strikes on its military sites and bases on its own territory – again to the resounding silence of the governments and media of the West.

As for the terrorists, whenever they have come close to being defeated by the Syrian Arab Army they have been able to call on the help of their “friends” to keep the war going.  They get this “help” at the diplomatic table in Geneva or through the deception that was the so-called “ceasefire” or through the sending of more weapons and of still more terrorists to Syria.  It is the Syrian people who suffer and pay the price.

The writer is a Syrian journalist who regularly writes under the name Syrian Afra’a.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Some Russian monarchists want Tsar Vladimir Putin

Latest news from Russian monarchists highlight the debate over bringing the Russian Empire back to life in modern times.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

A December 13 report in The Wall Street Journal shone light on a notion that has been afoot in the Russian Federation since the fall of Communism in 1991 – the restoration of the Monarchy as the form of government, complete with a new Tsar of all the Russias.

Of course, some of these monarchists have a top contender in mind for that post, none other than President Vladimir Putin himself.

This idea has long been used in a pejorative light in the West, as various shadowy and not-so-shadowy elements in the American media speculated over the years that Mr. Putin was actually aspiring to become Tsar. This was thrown around until probably the time that the Russian president spoke, lamenting the fall of Communism, and since then the prime accusation has been that President Putin wants to bring back the Soviet Union.

This is not true. It also does not appear to be the case that the Russian president wants to be Tsar. But the monarchists are not fazed in the slightest. Here is excerpted material from the WSJ piece, with emphases added:

The last time term limits forced Russian leader Vladimir Putin to step down from the presidency, he became prime minister for a few years.

This time around, a group of pro-Kremlin activists have a different idea: Proclaim him Czar Vladimir.

“We will do everything possible to make sure Putin stays in power as long as possible,” Konstantin Malofeyev, a politically active businessman, said recently to thunderous applause from hundreds of Russian Orthodox priests and members of the country’s top political parties gathered at a conference outside Moscow. They were united by one cause—to return the monarchy to Russia…

Even among those who want a monarchy, however, there are splits over what kind it should be. Is an absolute monarchy better than a constitutional monarchy? Should a blood line be established or should the czar be elected? For those who favor male succession, would it be a problem that Mr. Putin reportedly only has two daughters? Some have even suggested others besides Mr. Putin should accede to the throne.

There is a very keen interest indeed among some in Russia that propose various options as to who might best become Tsar in the event that the Monarchy is restored.

Grand Duke George Mikhailovich Romanov and his mother, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia, together with Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, head of the Russian Orthodox Church Department of External Relations

One candidate that has received significant attention is a man by the name of George Mikhailovich Romanov. He is an actual member of the Royal family, the heir apparent to Maria Vladimirovna Romanova, Grand Duchess of Russia. There are other heir apparents as well, and the issue as to who it should be has not been settled among the surviving members of the Romanov family.

The restoration of the Russian monarchy is unique because to carries strong religious significance. As far back as the 8th and 9th centuries, A.D., a host of saints and prophets appear to have foreseen the advent of the Soviet times and the restoration of the Tsar after their conclusion.

Some such prophecies are attributed to anonymous sources, but some are named. Here are two with rather extensive editing, so please go to the site linked for the fullest description of the prophecies.

Monk Abel the Prophet (+1831).

In a conversation with Tsar Paul I (+1801), after prophesying the destinies of all the Tsars from Paul I to Nicholas II:

“What is impossible for man is possible for God. God delays with His help, but it is said that He will give it soon and will raise the horn of Russian salvation. And there will arise a great prince from your race in exile, who stands for the sons of his people. He will be a chosen one of God, and on his head will be blessing. He will be the only one comprehensible to all, the very heart of Russia will sense him. His appearance will be sovereign and radiant, and nobody will say: ‘The Tsar is here or there’, but all will say: ‘That is him’. The will of the people will submit to the mercy of God, and he himself will confirm his calling. His name has occurred three times in Russian history. Two of the same name have already been on the throne, but not on the Tsar’s throne. But he will sit on the Tsar’s throne as the third. In him will be the salvation and happiness of the Russian realm.”

“Russian hopes will be realized upon [the cathedral of Hagia] Sophia in Tsargrad [Constantinople]; the Orthodox Cross will gleam again; Holy Rus will be filled with the smoke of incense and prayer, and will blossom like a heavenly lily.”

And from one of the most famous saints in Russian history:

St. John of Kronstadt (+1908):

“I foresee the restoration of a powerful Russia, still stronger and mightier than before. On the bones of these martyrs, remember, as on a strong foundation, will the new Russia we built – according to the old model; strong in her faith in Christ God and in the Holy Trinity! And there will be, in accordance with the covenant of the holy Prince Vladimir, a single Church! Russian people have ceased to understand what Rus is: it is the footstool of the Lord’s Throne! The Russian person must understand this and thank God that he is Russian.”

“The Church will remain unshaken to the end of the age, and a Monarch of Russia, if he remains faithful to the Orthodox Church, will be established on the Throne of Russia until the end of the age.”

What may surprise those in the West is that there are a great many people in Russia and in Orthodox Christian countries in general who take these prophecies quite seriously.

Interestingly enough, when the idea of restoring the monarchy was brought to President Putin’s attention, he regarded the idea as “beautiful” according to Lt. General Leonid Reshetnikov, but also expressed concern that it would lead to stagnation within the country.

A second statement, this one by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, noted that President Putin does not like the idea of bringing back the monarchy, but offered no comment on the conversation with Mr. Reshetnikov.

The idea of restoring the monarchy is not completely absurd. Britain overthrew its own monarchy in 1649 during that country’s Civil War, but it was restored shortly afterwards under King Charles II. Spain cast aside its monarchy in 1931, with its king, Alfonso XIII going into exile, but after sixteen years this monarchy, too, was restored.

Both of these monarchies have become largely ceremonial, with most governing functions carried out through some kind of Parliament and Prime Minister. It is therefore not clear what a ruling monarchy in Russia would look like.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

US confirms pullout from INF treaty, Moscow will respond if missiles placed in Europe – deputy FM

Moscow will respond to possible attempts to place short and intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles in Europe if the US decides to go on with this plan.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


Washington has confirmed its decision to withdraw from the INF treaty is final, Russia’s deputy foreign minister said, adding that Moscow will ‘take measures’ if American missiles that threaten its security are placed in Europe.

“Washington publicly announced its plans to withdraw from the treaty (the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) already in October. Through the high-level bilateral channels it was confirmed to us that this decision was final and wasn’t an attempt to initiate dialogue,” Sergey Ryabkov told the Kommersant newspaper.

The Deputy FM said that Moscow will respond to possible attempts to place short and intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles in Europe if the US decides to go on with this plan.

“We’ll be forced to come up with effective compensating measures. I’d like to warn against pushing the situation towards the eruption of new ‘missile crises.’ I am convinced that no sane country could be interested in something like this,” he said.

Russia isn’t threatening anybody, but have the necessary strength and means to counter any aggressor.
Back in October, President Donald Trump warned that Washington was planning unilateral withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty because “Russia has not adhered to the agreement.” The US leader also promised that the country would keep boosting its nuclear arsenal until Russia and China “come to their senses.”

Earlier this month, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that Washington will suspend its obligations under the treaty within 60 days if Russia does not “return to compliance.”

Signed in late 1988, the INF agreement was considered a milestone in ending the arms race between the US and the USSR.

In recent years, Moscow and Washington have repeatedly accused each other of violating the INF deal. While the US has alleged that Russia has developed missiles prohibited by the treaty, Russia insists that the American anti-missile systems deployed in Eastern Europe can actually be used to launch intermediate-range cruise missiles.

The deputy FM said that Washington “never made a secret” of the fact that its INF treaty pullout “wasn’t so much about problems between the US and Russia, but about the desire of the Americans to get rid of all restrictions that were inconvenient for them.”

The US side expressed belief that the INF deal “significantly limits the US military’s capabilities to counter states with arsenals of medium-range and shorter-range ground-based missiles,” which threaten American interests, he said. “China, Iran and North Korea” were specifically mentioned by Washington, Ryabkov added.

“I don’t think that we’re talking about a new missile crisis, but the US plans are so far absolutely unclear,” Mikhail Khodarenok, retired colonel and military expert, told RT, reminding that the Americans have avoided any type of “meaningful discussion” with Moscow in regards to its INF deal pullout.

While “there’ll be no deployment of [US missiles] in Europe any time soon,” Moscow should expect that Washington would try to void other agreements with Russia as well, Khodarenok warned.

The INF deal “just stopped being beneficial for the US. Next up are all the other arms control treaties. There’ll be no resistance from the NATO allies [to US actions],” he said.

“The neocons who run Trump’s foreign policy never have liked arms reduction treaties,” former Pentagon official Michael Maloof told RT. “The new START treaty which comes up for renewal also could be in jeopardy.”

“The risk of a new nuclear buildup is really quite obvious” if the US withdrawals from the INF treaty, Dan Smith, the director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, told RT.

“I think the relations between the great powers – the US and Russia as well as the US and China – are more difficult than they’ve been for a long time,” he added.

However, with Washington having indicated that it wants China to be part of the new deal, “there are still possibilities for negotiations and agreement,” according to Smith. Nonetheless, he warned that following this path will demand strong political will and tactical thinking from the leadership of all three countries.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

US Pressures Germany To Ditch Huawei Over ‘Security Concerns’

This news will likely not go over well in Beijing, which is still struggling with the US and Canada over the arrest of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


First it was Australia, New Zealand and Japan, now the US is pressing the German government to refuse to use equipment manufactured by Chinese telecom giant Huawei as Europe’s largest economy seeks to build out its 5G infrastructure.

According to Bloomberg, a US delegation met on Friday with German Foreign Ministry officials in Berlin to talk about the security risks presented by Huawei’s equipment, which the US says is vulnerable to spying. The meeting in Germany follows a report from late last month claiming the US had launched an “extraordinary outreach campaign” to warn its allies against using Huawei equipment (while its vulnerability to Chinese spying has been cited as the reason to avoid Huawei, it’s also worth noting that the US and China are locked in a battle for who will dominate the global 5G space…a battle that Huawei is currently winning).

Germany is set to hold an auction early next year to find a supplier to help expand its 5G network. The Berlin meeting took place one day after Deutsche Telekom said it would reexamine its decision to use Huawei equipment.

US officials are optimistic that their warnings are getting a hearing, though any detailed talks are in early stages and no concrete commitments have been made, according to one of the people.

The US pressure on Germany underscores increased scrutiny of Huawei as governments grapple with fears that the telecom-equipment maker’s gear is an enabler for Chinese espionage. The Berlin meeting took place a day after German carrier Deutsche Telekom AG said it will re-evaluate its purchasing strategy on Huawei, an indication that it may drop the Chinese company from its list of network suppliers.

France is also reportedly considering further restrictions after adding Huawei products to its “high alert” list. The US has already passed a ban preventing government agencies from using anything made by Huawei. But the telecoms equipment provider isn’t taking these threats to its business lying down.

U.S. warnings over espionage are a delicate matter in Germany. Revelations over the scale of the National Security Agency’s signals intelligence, including reports of tapping Merkel’s mobile phone, are still fresh in Berlin five years after they came to light.

Huawei is pushing back against the accusations. The company’s rotating chairman warned this week that blacklisting the Chinese company without proof will hurt the industry and disrupt the emergence of new wireless technology globally. Ken Hu, speaking at a Huawei manufacturing base in Dongguan, cited “groundless speculation,” in some of the first public comments since the shock arrest of the company’s chief financial officer.

This news will likely not go over well in Beijing, which is still struggling with the US and Canada over the arrest of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver. In an editorial published Sunday, the Global Times, an English-language mouthpiece for the Communist Party, warned that China should retaliate against any country that – like Australia – takes a hard line against Huawei. So, if you’re a German citizen in Beijing, you might want to consider getting the hell out of Dodge.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending