[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Editorial See other Editorial Articles Title: Michael Springmann: Disintegrating Syria Part of Zionist Plan to Remove Any Strong Arab State TEHRAN (FNA)- Author and political analyst Michael Springmann says the United States, under the influence of the Zionist regime, seeks to disintegrate Syria and to work towards a "Greater Kurdistan". Michael Springmann, in an exclusive interview with FNA, said that destabilization and disintegration of Syria is part of the Zionist plan to remove any strong Arab state to ensure the security of the Zionist regime and also to make sure that Syria would never reclaim its lands already occupied by the regime. Commenting on the Turkish military intervention in Syria, Mr. Springmann further added that Erdogan who sees himself as a new Ottoman sultan seeks to grab Syrian land and also contain the Kurds in Syria. Michael Springmann is an attorney and former diplomat who lives and works in Washington, DC. He holds two degrees in international affairs in addition to his law degree. Springmann spent nine years as a diplomat. Prior to leaving the US Department of State, he served in its Bureau of Intelligence and Research. Now a writer and political commentator, Springmann is also the author of “Visas for Al Qaeda: CIA Handouts That Rocked the World,” which discusses America’s destabilization of the Balkans, South and Southwest Asia, and North Africa to achieve international goals. FNA has conducted an interview with Michael Springmann about the Syrian crisis and the recent developments surrounding the issue namely the US’ plan for an independence Kurdish state on Syrian soil and the Turkish military intervention of the country. Below you will find the full text of the interview. Q: Since the beginning of the crisis in Syria, Saudi Arabia has been actively supporting terrorists in the country. These terrorists are now losing ground every day. What do you think would be the implications of such failure for the Saudi foreign policy? A: In my view, the implications would be far-ranging. First, they would make life uncomfortable for the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS). He's apparently taken over from "Bandar Bush", Bandar bin Sultan Al-Saud, as the driving force behind terrorism in Syria and elsewhere. Prince Bandar, I think, overreached himself in pouring resources into the various terrorist groups operating in Syria. He didn't achieve anything except to further destabilize and destroy the country. However, he failed in overthrowing Bashar al-Assad and he likely cauased the Russians to step in and help keep Syria togerther. The same can now be said of MBS. The extremists the Saudis, i.e., Prince Mohammad, backed are losing ground and the Americans are evacuating them to Afghanistan as the Russian foreign ministry has stated. If MBS had succeeded, he would have been able to get away with the Syrian intervention while playing to a young domestic audience eager for cinemas and night life. Now, with the potentially destabilizing Plan 2030 in gear and built-up expectations for the young people (at odds with the elder genertion's more conservative views) possibly in jeopardy, he's caught between a rock and a hard place. To the Saudis, failure abroad may well mean failure at home, especially for the man who liquidated potential opposition through jail terms, detention, and assassination. Conceivably, existing but concealed opposition to him and his methods could increase and surface, bringing about another palace coup. Moreover, failure in Syria will show the Saudi foreign policy to be ineffective and the state incapable of exerting its will. Other Arab nations and other Muslim nations will see the Saudis, already widely disliked, as weaklings and, despite their oil wealth and US connections, a country to be, if not ignored, one to be disregarded. Failure in Syria will go hand in hand with failure in Yemen, another of MBS' "projects". Even the Europeans are beginning to question Saudi murder, war crimes, and human rights violations in that unhappy country. The British people, outraged at arms sales to the Saudis for the Yemen war, are now demanding that bin Salman be excluded from entering the UK. If other Arab and Muslim states begin to oppose or drift away from supporting Saudi policy, the Kingdom will be left with its repressive allies on the [Persian] Gulf, the [Persian] Gulf Cooperation Council, and little else. Q: We have seen the Israeli regime and the so-called US-led coalition targeting Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and its allied forces many times. What do you think is the reason for such moves? A: Israel and the United States want to see Syria destroyed. A socialist, secular state, Syria is like Iraq--both didn't always toe the line the Americans and Israelis laid down. Moreover, it couldn't be allowed to exist and resist. In the past, the US and Saudi Arabia tried various means of bringing down the government, such as buying the head of the Syrian intelligence service--who didn't stay bought because he was outraged that Israel was fighting Arab countries at the time. If the Syrian Arab Army, the legitimate government's order-keeping force, is destroyed by Israel, the US, and their allies, then there would be no difficulty at all in overthrowing Bashar al-Assad's government, breaking up the country into as many pieces as there are confessions, ethnic groups, and political viewpoints. The US and Israel would then be able to impose their own government with their own hand-picked leaders to run what's left of the country. Syria and Iran are the only survivors of the American plan, discovered by retired 4-Star Army General Wesley Clark and recounted on the US TV program Democracy Now (March 2, 2007): in the midst of the Afghan war, he was told about “...a [Pentagon] memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” (Lebanon, though destabilized, seems to have been replaced with Yemen.) Additionally, Syria is next door to Israel and Israel has already seized Syrian territory and incorporated it into Greater Israel. The Zionist Entity would like nothing better than to ensure that Syria will never reclaim its land and be a perceived threat to Israel again. (If it ever was.) Q: The so-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have received tremendous amount of arms and support from the United States, initially with the stated aim of fighting Daesh (also known as ISIL or ISIS). But apparently, the US is now preparing the ground to establish an independent Kurdish state in Syria. What do you think the US is seeking to achieve by disintegrating Syria? A: As noted above, disintegrating Syria will aid the Zionists. The US, at Israel’s urging, went to war repeatedly in Iraq, wrecking a country with 5,000 years of recorded history behind it, including the concept of the Zero, basic to advanced mathematics. The Zionist entity wanted the removal of any strong Arab state. Syria is the last one, now that Iraq is gone. With Syria destroyed, there will be millions more refugees and migrants herded into Europe, antagonizing the continent's inhabitants and prejudicing them against Arabs and Muslims. This is a long-term Israeli goal: depict Arabs and Muslims as fanatics, unable to adapt to "civilization". As long as this happens, Israel will feel "secure". And it is happening there. The Europeans see the great increase in crime that came with the migrant wave and blame Arabs and Muslims for it. Additionally with migrants forced into Europe, Israel will gain more control over governments there. Already, in Germany and at its cultural office in Washington, D.C., officials are saying that German Jews must be protected from the Arabs and Muslims flowing into the country from wars in the Middle East. Also, with Syria divided, the US will be able to work towards a "Greater Kurdistan", linking part of Syria to northern Iraq. This would likely be an opening move to create unrest in the Kurdish regions of Iran, leading, the Americans and Israelis hope for the so-called "regime change" there. Q: US announcement on its plans to recognize a Kurdish state in Syria has seemingly provoked Turkish invasion of Kurdish areas. What do you think are the objectives of this military assault and how do you think this recent development would affect the peace process in Syria? A: In general, the Turks are in Syria to control the Kurds which they’ve been oppressing in Turkey since the end of the Ottoman Empire and the creation of the country. I think they also see their Syrian intervention as a means both to grab Syrian territory and prevent the Kurds outside Turkey from unifying and linking with Kurds in Turkey. They’re hitting the US-backed Kurds as part of this. I imagine they’re afraid of the Americans creating an independent group of Kurds tied to the US. With the Turks in Syria fighting Kurds supported or not supported by the US and controlling more and more Syrian territory, any negotiations attempting to achieve peace in Syria will founder. There are too many interests involved: the Turks’, the Americans', the Israelis', the Kurds', and all the various groups already existing or created by the war. All of the armed groups will try to achieve on the battlefield what they can't manage at the negotiation table. And every time an effort is made to bring the various parties togerther, one group or another will balk at participating. Additionally, I have the feeling that Erdogan sees himself as a new sultan and wants to re-create the Ottoman Empire, which occupied Syria. I don't believe the Turks will support any kind of settlement that doesn't include their continued control in some form or another of a good bit of Syria. Poster Comment: Seems like an honest assessment. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||