Syria: Forward from Victory – Part I
With a fair amount of dust now having settled, it is inarguably clear that Syrian civilization has emerged victorious from the last round of intensified threats from the Atlanticist regime.
Syria, with assistance from its friends in the real international community, have declared “Victory”. After several years of concerted efforts by the Atlanticists to bring about ‘regime change’ in Syria, events began to decisively turn around in a direction favoring Syrian civilization in April 2013 ‘on the ground’. Additionally the various factions of invaders and to a lesser extent insurgents, have increased their attacks on each other. A number of colliding factors led to the present victory of Syria and the Assad administration in Damascus.
While there are broader economic and geopolitical factors at work, the following recaps at least some of the memorable news items which, in the public mind’s eye, were decisive.
- Turkey’s first attempt to test Syrian air defense systems resulted in the downing of that Turkish F-4 Phantom II on June 22, 2012.
- Syria launched a largely successful internal and external media campaign: This was to shift opinion towards the restoration ‘normalcy’ and the salvation of Syrian civilization. Syrian people’s own direct experience with peninsular backed invaders was even more significant in shifting internal opinion; public executions including very bloody, painful, and slow beheadings were apparently unpopular. While many Syrians support or supported a legal, popular, public, and sane process of reform which involves all of the vested national interests, the ‘Arab Spring’ demonstrations/marches in Damascus and Aleppo had increasingly little to do with the foreign invasion and it’s death squads in the public mind’s eye.
- “Internal” fighting among various insurgent and invasion groupings: This reduced the power of the FSA. Takfiri and specifically Wahhabist elements also saw secular, liberal, pluralist, and liberal connected elements operating behind the FSA as an enemy and not an ally and began a military campaign against them as well. This both reflected and exacerbated the regional hegemonic and tactical differences between Turkey, Egypt and Qatar.
- Iran rebounds from sanctions: In a November 2012 interview, CSS custodian and PR Director Joaquin Flores as well as other analysts accurately predicted that sanctions against Iran would be of little significance ultimately as Iran would be compelled to re-organize its financial and trade relationships in a direction it was already headed. The development of the BRICS bloc and the dollar exclusion zone, as well as increased trade with UNASUR economy of South America make Atlanticist threats of Iran being ‘cut off’ from the ‘world economy’ sound extraordinarily anachronistic, besides being both arrogant and foolish if taken literally. Iran’s ‘rebound’ from the initial shock allowed it to continue to play a robust role in not only funding and arming Hezbollah, but using its leverage to influence Hamas towards a more neutral of not neutered role in the Syrian situation.
- Iran encouraged Hezbollah to focus on several areas both politically and militarily: This was to block FSA supply chains in the south. Hezbollah additionally worked special detail operations to push takfiri invaders out of a number of smaller towns and villages.
- Russian intelligence abroad: By working a complex course of leadership, collusion, cooperation and subversion of and through Atlanticist and Russian backed NGO’s in Turkey they brought about some important changes in the relationship between the Turkish state. In particular local government and police working against some of the FSA mercenaries taking refuge along the Syrian border in Turkey. A significant related newsworthy item was the Turkish police seizure of FSA munitions. These are also related to the ‘Turkish Spring’ which was covered in some detail in a past edition at the Center.
- Russian naval presence increased significantly over the last two years: And in addition Iranian presence was upped as well as Chinese. Taken together, these significantly mitigated the efficacy of the US naval buildup in the same region.
- Russia and China continued to vote down any UN Security Council resolution which either authorized or opened up any vague possibility for the use of force under any pretext.
- Anti-Globalization/Anti-Imperialist forces on both the left and the right on the European Continent, Britain, and in the US: These played a smaller but also significant role, especially in the US where public opinion for a Syrian adventure is negative even among the same Democratic Party to which the president belongs. It is also negative among many Republicans who are either repulsed by FSA attacks on Christian villages or are sympathetic to the anti-imperialism of the anti-interventionist Ron Paul tendency.
- General Sisi leads a June 30th military coup in Egypt, pulling Egypt out of the Turkish sphere of influence. Sisi simultaneously receives backing from Gulf States, Iran, and Russia. Sisi recommits to the old Egypt-Syria defense pact which Morsi had dismembered. Was this the real nature of the Putin meeting with Bandar bin Sultan? Sisi commits to blocking the Suez to ships involved in attacking Syria.
- September 3rd, Israel conducts a ‘stance test’ by launching two missiles from a location in Mediterranean towards either Syria or Israel (info is unclear). These may have been programmed to fall into the sea, or they may have been shot down by Russian naval forces. This had the effect of making observers aware that the collision of NATO hardware with Russian hardware would mean the proxy war develops into an outright war. The ‘stance test’ concludes in Syria and Russia’s favor. Shortly thereafter, European NATO member countries increasingly support a ‘UN Resolution’ over a joint NATO strike without UN approval.
- September 11th, after US’s Obama backs off of imminent attack rhetoric he comes out publicly in favor of Russian plan.
- Russia puts forward plan to send Russian military advisers on the ground to Syria to protect the dismantling of chemical sites. This is seen by many analysis as a plan to put Russian boots on the ground which would prevent further NATO aggression unless a larger conflict of global proportions is on the table.
Syria’s government has been successful to date in working with its allies both within the country and the world to stave off a US led act of aggression. At the same time however, there were a number of unresolved political and social questions which, if left as such, will form the basis for continued attacks on the part of the Atlanticist regime upon Syrian civilization.
Formal democratic proceduralism of the modern variety is often little more than a popular and bureaucratic front for the maintenance of the rule of a given elite. At the same time political developments fomenting from within and outside of this process can spiral out of control and an displace the rule of a given elite for a new elite.
But this spiraling out of control typically happens under specific conditions, and normally when the ruling elite subscribes to the ideology of liberalism and pluralism to the extent that they fail to understand how real power is maintained under conditions of liberalism and pluralism. This is because the ideology and mythology of how liberal pluralist societies work combined with a utopian ideal of how they will work in the future is at odds with the reality. In reality the relatively homogeneous security apparatus works with the media monopoly to ensure the stability and sovereignty of that ostensibly liberal, pluralist ‘democratic’ societal mode.
In part two of this series we will explore in further detail the prospects for a form of pluralism in Syria which fits in well with the ‘spirit of the age’ and can meet the real and equally important imagined needs of the Syrian people. We will describe how this can be done without becoming susceptible to Atlanticist political attacks.