Did
the White House Help Plan the Syrian Chemical Attack?
Global Research, September 01, 2013
There is a growing volume of new evidence
from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian
opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case,
based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical
strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian
opposition.
The extent of US foreknowledge of this
provocation needs further investigation because available data puts the
“horror” of the Barack Obama White House in a different and disturbing light.
On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition
forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular
military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders
and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat
Amriki”] took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya,
Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian
Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who
had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent
escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in
turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.
The opposition forces had to quickly prepare their forces
for exploiting the US-led bombing in order to march on Damascus and topple the
Bashar al-Assad Government, the senior commanders explained. The Qatari and
Turkish intelligence officials assured the Syrian regional commanders that they
would be provided with plenty of weapons for the coming offensive.
Indeed, unprecedented weapons distribution started in all
opposition camps in Hatay Province on August 21-23, 2013. In the Reyhanli area
alone, opposition forces received well in excess of 400 tons of weapons, mainly
anti-aircraft weaponry from shoulder-fired missiles to ammunition for
light-guns and machineguns. The weapons were distributed from store-houses
controlled by Qatari and Turkish Intelligence under the tight supervision of US
Intelligence.
These weapons were loaded on more than 20 trailer-trucks
which crossed into northern Syria and distributed the weapons to several
depots. Follow-up weapon shipments, also several hundred tons, took place over
the weekend of August 24-25, 2013, and included mainly sophisticated anti-tank
guided missiles and rockets. Opposition officials in Hatay said that these
weapon shipments were “the biggest” they had received “since the beginning of
the turmoil more than two years ago”. The deliveries from Hatay went to all the
rebel forces operating in the Idlib-to-Aleppo area, including the al-Qaida
affiliated jihadists (who constitute the largest rebel forces in the area).
Several senior officials from both the Syrian opposition
and sponsoring Arab states stressed that these weapon deliveries were
specifically in anticipation for exploiting the impact of imminent bombing of
Syria by the US and the Western allies. The latest strategy formulation and
coordination meetings took place on August 26, 2013. The political coordination
meeting took place in Istanbul and was attended by US Amb. Robert Ford.
More important were the military and operational
coordination meetings at the Antakya garrison. Senior Turkish, Qatari, and US
Intelligence officials attended in addition to the Syrian senior (opposition)
commanders. The Syrians were informed that bombing would start in a few days.
“The opposition was told in clear terms that action to
deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early
as in the next few days,” a Syrian participant in the meeting said. Another
Syrian participant said that he was convinced US bombing was scheduled to begin
on Thursday, August 29, 2013. Several participants — both Syrian and Arab —
stressed that the assurances of forthcoming bombing were most explicit even as
formally Obama is still undecided.
The descriptions of these meetings raise the question of
the extent of foreknowledge of US Intelligence, and therefore, the Obama White
House. All the sources consulted — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that
officials of the “Mukhabarat Amriki” actively participated in the meetings and
briefings in Turkey. Therefore, at the very least, they should have known that
the opposition leaders were anticipating “a war-changing development”: that is,
a dramatic event which would provoke a US-led military intervention.
The mere fact that weapon storage sites under the tight
supervision of US Intelligence were opened up and about a thousand tons of
high-quality weapons were distributed to the opposition indicates that US
Intelligence anticipated such a provocation and the opportunity for the Syrian
opposition to exploit the impact of the ensuing US and allied bombing. Hence,
even if the Obama White House did not know in advance of the chemical
provocation, they should have concluded, or at the very least suspected, that
the chemical attack was most likely the “war-changing development” anticipated
by the opposition leaders as provocation of US-led bombing. Under such
circumstances, the Obama White House should have refrained from rushing head-on
to accuse Assad’s Damascus and threaten retaliation, thus making the Obama
White House at the very least complicit after the act.
Meanwhile, additional data from Damascus about the actual
chemical attack increases the doubts about Washington’s version of events.
Immediately after the attack, three hospitals of Doctors Without Borders (MSF:
médecins sans frontières) in the greater Damascus area treated more than 3,600
Syrians affected by the chemical attack, and 355 of them died. MSF performed
tests on the vast majority of those treated.
MSF director of operations Bart Janssens summed up the
findings: “MSF can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms
nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the reported symptoms
of the patients, in addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events —
characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the
origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers
— strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent.” Simply put, even
after testing some 3,600 patients, MSF failed to confirm that sarin was the
cause of the injuries. According to MSF, the cause could have been nerve agents
like sarin, concentrated riot control gas, or even high-concentration pesticides.
Moreover, opposition reports that there was distinct stench during the attack
suggest that it could have come from the “kitchen sarin” used by jihadist
groups (as distinct from the odorless military-type sarin) or improvised agents
like pesticides.
Some of the evidence touted by the Obama White House is
questionable at best.
A small incident in Beirut raises big questions. A day
after the chemical attack, Lebanese fixers working for the “Mukhabarat Amriki”
succeeded to convince a Syrian male who claimed to have been injured in the
chemical attack to seek medical aid in Beirut in return for a hefty sum that
would effectively settle him for life. The man was put into an ambulance and
transferred overnight to the Farhat Hospital in Jib Janine, Beirut. The Obama
White House immediately leaked friendly media that “the Lebanese Red Cross
announced that test results found traces of sarin gas in his blood.” However,
this was news to Lebanese intelligence and Red Cross officials.
According to senior intelligence officials, “Red Cross Operations Director
George Kettaneh told [them] that the injured Syrian fled the hospital before
doctors were able to test for traces of toxic gas in his blood.” Apparently,
the patient declared that he had recovered from his nausea and no longer needed
medical treatment. The Lebanese security forces are still searching for the
Syrian patient and his honorarium.
On August 24, 2013, Syrian Commando forces acted on
intelligence about the possible perpetrators of the chemical attack and raided
a cluster of rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb of Jobar. Canisters of toxic
material were hit in the fierce fire-fight as several Syrian soldiers suffered
from suffocation and “some of the injured are in a critical condition”.
The Commando eventually seized an opposition warehouse
containing barrels full of chemicals required for mixing “kitchen sarin”,
laboratory equipment, as well as a large number of protective masks. The Syrian
Commando also captured several improvised explosive devices, RPG rounds, and
mortar shells. The same day, at least four HizbAllah fighters operating in
Damascus near Ghouta were hit by chemical agents at the very same time the
Syrian Commando unit was hit while searching a group of rebel tunnels in Jobar.
Both the Syrian and the HizbAllah forces were acting on intelligence
information about the real perpetrators of the chemical attack. Damascus told
Moscow the Syrian troops were hit by some form of a nerve agent and sent
samples (blood, tissues, and soil) and captured equipment to Russia.
Several Syrian leaders, many of whom are not Bashar
al-Assad supporters and are even his sworn enemies, are now convinced that the
Syrian opposition is responsible for the August 21, 2013, chemical attack in
the Damascus area in order to provoke the US and the allies into bombing
Assad’s Syria. Most explicit and eloquent is Saleh Muslim, the head of the
Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) which has been fighting the Syrian
Government. Muslim doubts Assad would have used chemical weapons when he was
winning the civil war.
“The regime in Syria … has chemical weapons, but they
wouldn’t use them around Damascus, five km from the [UN] committee which is
investigating chemical weapons. Of course they are not so stupid as to do so,”
Muslim told Reuters on August 27, 2013. He believes the attack was “aimed at
framing Assad and provoking an international reaction”. Muslim is convinced
that “some other sides who want to blame the Syrian regime, who want to show
them as guilty and then see action” is responsible for the chemical attack. The
US was exploiting the attack to further its own anti-Assad policies and should
the UN inspectors find evidence that the rebels were behind the attack, then
“everybody would forget it”, Muslim shrugged. “Who is the side who would be
punished? Are they are going to punish the Emir of Qatar or the King of Saudi
Arabia, or Mr Erdo?an of Turkey?”
And there remain the questions: Given the extent of the
involvement of the “Mukhabarat Amriki” in opposition activities, how is that US
Intelligence did not know in advance about the opposition’s planned use of
chemical weapons in Damascus?
It is a colossal failure.
And if they did know and warned the Obama White House,
why then the sanctimonious rush to blame the Assad Administration?
Moreover, how can the Obama Administration continue to
support and seek to empower the opposition which had just intentionally killed
some 1,300 innocent civilians in order to provoke a US military intervention?
Yossef Bodansky, Senior Editor,
GIS/Defense & Foreign Affairs
Copyright Defense and Foreign Affairs and Oilprice.com
2013
Copyright © 2013 Global Research
No comments:
Post a Comment