Will Trump Make Eastern Ghouta the Sacrificial Lamb for Permanent Occupation of Syria?

Rasa - The end of the fight against ISIL by allied forces of Iran, Syria, Russia and Hezbollah has taken away any legal justification for the presence of US troops, but Washington has suggested they plan to maintain a presence in the north forever.

News ID: 436714

Date: 05 March 2018 - 18:25

RNA - Earlier this month, the Syrian government called on Washington to withdraw its forces now that the fight against the ISIL militant group is nearly over. The Trump administration’s big lie is that “we are fighting ISIL” to address their illegal military presence that continues to plague the nation, when really they are just doing the wrong things, including but not limited to:

-Aiding and abetting various terror groups and separatists.

-Killing Syrian forces and their allies, including Russian contractors.

-Derailing the ongoing peace talks, the ceasefire and the de-escalation zones agreements.

-Blaming Syrian Army for chemical attacks even though they know their proxies are responsible.

-Putting Iran and Russia ‘on notice' about the dreadful situation in Eastern Ghouta and elsewhere.

-Saying Russia and Iran must respect the UN ceasefire while the US bombs them and the civilians.

-Considering new attacks against allied forces “equal to or greater than the one used last time.”

-Seeing the fighting in Eastern Ghouta as analogous to Syria’s recovery of the major city of Aleppo in the waning months of Obama’s presidency, with Trump being keen to show himself as different from Obama by being much more aggressive about the matter.

What this all means, however, is that the presence of US troops in Northern Syria is only meant to help train and support Kurdish-dominated local forces and ‘moderate’ Arab proxies in their failed struggle to divide Syria on sectarian lines and ultimately impose regime change in Damascus. That has raised concern about a more permanent project that risks drawing the US into a conflict with Syria and its allies, Iran and Russia.

This also explains why the number of US troops has grown gradually, including Special Forces, a Marine artillery unit, forward air controllers and others. They are spreading across more than a dozen bases in northern Syria – all without any invitation from the Syrian government or a United Nations mandate. Earlier this month, the Syrian Foreign Ministry also issued a statement saying the presence of US troops will not force a political solution to the conflict.

Taken together, President Trump’s attempt to channel Eastern Ghouta in his feigned contempt over the alleged atrocity by Syrian Army may have fooled some people, but the international civil society can see right through his pretentious façade. If he really believed that ‘Syrian Lives Matter,’ he would never have enforced a travel ban on vulnerable refugees from the war-torn country.

Further, didn’t one of his first acts of presidential violence result in the murder of many young Syrians? Did he really believe that the Tomahawk missiles had the intelligence to distinguish between Syrian bases and the civilian casualties of his most recent act of aggression?

Here again, this is not just an indictment on Trump; the entire war-party Washington has the blood of innocent Syrians on its hand. Although he is nowhere nearly as depraved as his successor, even President Obama appeared comfortable with the concept of human collateral damage with his escalation of drone warfare in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and Syria.

In the same mode, Trump is using the civilians of Eastern Ghouta as props for his grand plan to escalate the conflict. He views Syria as a rich man’s playground that is ripe for exploitation, and wants to trigger a new arms race in the region to create more jobs for the Military-Industrial Complex. In fact, he has made no secret about his desire to steal Arab oil to pay for the rebuilding of societies that were decimated by the War Party’s foreign policy. He couldn’t care less about the impact such an act would have on the besieged people of Eastern Ghouta.

What’s more, Trump’s bullish impunity, his blatant disrespect for International Humanitarian Law, and his undeniable enticement to war with Iran and Russia is a direct affront to International Law. If he’s so concerned about human rights abuses, why doesn’t he act against the actions of the warmongering mob and terror proxies that permeate civilian sufferings in Eastern Ghouta? Trump can say what he wants about the region’s situation to the world, but an argument can easily be made that the War Party benefits the most from the bloodshed; from making Eastern Ghouta the sacrificial lamb and the reason to occupy Northern Syria forever.

847/940