If this document had been published sooner, it could have dramatically changed the course of the war by exposing the true face of the moderate rebels and potentially saved tens of thousands of lives. That didnt happen, and no reason has been given by the Intercept for its delay.
On Tuesday, the Intercept published a hitherto unknown document from the trove of National Security Administration (NSA) documents leaked by Edward Snowden over three years ago. The document was notable as it shed light on the early days of the Syrian conflict and the fact that, for the past six years, so-called revolutionary groups aimed at toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have largely acted as proxies for foreign governments pushing regime change.
The document explicitly reveals that an attack led by the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which was intended to mark the anniversary of the 2011 uprising that sparked the Syrian conflict, was directed by a Saudi prince. The document proves, in essence, that the armed opposition in Syria from the earlier years of the conflict was under the direct command of foreign governments pushing for regime change. An NSA graphic released by The Intercept outlines Saudi involvement in organizing and supplying Syrian opposition forces for attacks on Syria's civilian infrastructure.
An NSA graphic released by The Intercept outlines Saudi involvement in organizing and supplying Syrian opposition forces for attacks on Syrias civilian infrastructure.
According to the document, Saudi Prince Salman bin Sultan had ordered the FSA to light up Damascus and flatten the citys civilian airport. The Saudis had also sent 120 tons of explosives/weapons to opposition forces for the operation. The Saudis, as the document notes, were very pleased with the outcome, which claimed at least 60 lives.
The implications of the NSA document are significant. It offers the clearest proof, in the form of official U.S. government documents, detailing the direct relationship between the armed Syrian opposition and foreign governments, and exposing the fact that this relationship existed much earlier than the mainstream narrative on the conflict had previously suggested.
However, the Intercept article regarding the document is unusual for several reasons. First, the report inaccurately claims that the attack launched at the Saudis behest did not result in any confirmed casualties. Second, it states that the 2011 uprising in Syria was an organic, peaceful movement that led the Syrian government to wage an open war against their own people a narrative that has since been debunked.
Yet, the largest oversight of all is the articles failure to mention the U.S. role in funding the Free Syrian Army, as well as the CIAs well-documented role in training the FSA and pumping tons of weapons into Syria in order to foment and exacerbate the conflict in its early days. In light of the NSA documents revelation that the U.S. had been given advance notice of the planned FSA attack on a civilian target, no less Washingtons decision to let it proceed clearly suggests that the U.S. was involved in and well aware of the Saudi directives to the FSA. However, the Intercept piece chooses not to mention this crucial context.
Click for Full Text!