Irredeemably Flawed and Deeply Harmful US Coalition Cannot Get the ‘Job’ Done in Syria

Rasa - Mainstream media in the West would like us to believe that US President Donald Trump is in the process of building a coalition of allies to participate in a multi-nation strike force attack against the Syrian government.

News ID: 437167

Date: 11 April 2018 - 23:49

RNA - This talk of coalition action reflects the rapid escalation of plans since US officials embraced Saturday’s allegations of a chemical weapons strike. This crisply formulated aphorism just might require a bit of updating:

A- The War Party built that dubious coalition seven years ago to regime change Syria and failed. That coalition included Israel, Saudi Arabia and a host of other Persian Gulf Arab states plus some covert ties with ISIL and Al-Qaeda. Meantime, the US used every possible trick in the book for excuses to carry out military strikes against Syrian government forces, including alleged chemical attacks.

B- Instead of a one-off strike, as with last April’s tomahawk missile bombardment of Syria, the US seems to be envisioning starting a wave of attacks against Syria using the chemical pretext all over again, although but of course at the scale of contained engagement. Yet, this new theater will no doubt fail. After all, there no longer exists ISIL and Al-Qaeda forces in their tens of thousands to support US warplanes in the sky, and bankrupt Saudi Arabia and partners no longer seem to have the money to finance it.

C- This whole saga began when the US and its terror proxies claimed Syrian forces carried out chemical attacks against the rebel-held city of Douma on Saturday. This is while the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has been invited to investigate the allegations, and with no concrete evidence the Saturday attack even took place, such a finding by the watchdog should easily derail the war. But wait. US officials have other things in mind. They want to start war before the OPCW has a chance to do anything!

D- Forget about a direct UN Security Council investigation. The US and their allies rejected a Russian resolution calling for such an inquiry on Wednesday. This was seen as retaliation for Russia rejecting a resolution that would just blame Syria for it without a proper inquiry and pave the way for a US-led invasion – a worn-out scenario that has been in play repeatedly either for initiating a full-fledged war on Iraq or for launching a missile attack on Syria last year.

E- The warmongering hordes are in no mood to listen to the Syrian Red Crescent. The Red Crescent has issued a statement dismissing the US allegations of the chemical weapon attack in Douma. The statement insists their medical personnel in the city found no evidence any such attack took place. The Red Crescent also says their hospital in Douma received six patients complaining of respiratory problems, but that they didn’t seem to have any physical problems at all, nor was there any trace of any chemical agents they might have been exposed to. Washington doesn’t want to have any of this.

F- This raises the risk of the US getting into a conflict with Russia. Already, Russia has warned of consequences if the US attacks Syria over the baseless allegation. President Trump has not only indicated Syria will “pay the price,” but that Russia and Iran are going to have to pay as well. The US is not at all capable of or even willing to initiate a full-scale war on the trio as they know would mean hell for the US troops throughout the world. French President Emmanuel Macron has spoken out about attacking Syria, and has pointed to his nation, along with Britain, being committed to a “strong and joint response” with the US. This coalition making seems to be more a show of Western resolve - than being a firm decision to be followed by actions - to convince Russia to soften tone and stay off a limited missile strike on targets in Syria. But, the abundance in responses coming from various Russian officials indicates that Moscow knows the bluff and may not step back in the confrontation with Donald Trump's crisis escalation policy.

G- The dodgy coalition the US is in the process of building will include the usual suspects: France, Britain, Australia, Saudi Arabia, and Israel (who is always attacking Syria at any rate), among others. It gets rather interesting to remember that these are the same usual suspects that invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Yemen in a full-scale war, and lost. Now they are taking their chance for a very limited and contained engagement.

H- Away from an acute lack of capability, the US and its allies know that a costly, and inconclusive war in the region will certainly destabilize the planet. Israeli-Saudi involvement assures that the war will quickly include Iranian and resistance forces in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine. All of this, as well as the risks of 200 dollars a barrel crude oil and the foolish war expanding across the Yemeni and Syrian borders, has filled the criminals with such fright that a full-scale war is deemed as a bad idea for Washington and a host of lackeys. And that's exactly why the US has embarked on forming a coalition unlike its last year missile strike in the hope that it could convince Moscow to back off and allow a limited strike on Syria. The last time that a nation sought to raise the stakes to convince Moscow to give some room and space to others in Syria was a couple of years ago, when the Russian president proved his skills in using crisis escalation policy and made his Turkish counterpart to extend an official apology for shooting down a Russian warplane. And this is just the beginning and we have not even started talking about Iran's reaction yet. Two senior Iranian commanders were in Syria in mid 2017 and each sent a warning signal to the US and Israel in their statements during their visit to the war-ravaged country, but apparently Washington has treated them as usual words and failed to decipher the message. They need to take a look back to realize that a contained engagement is too small to bring them a share and an effective role in Syria.

According to Fars News Agancy, taking the new Syria war rhetoric and turning it inside out, a sensible conclusion has to be this: In Syria, the victorious do what they will, while the defeated suffer what they must in utter humiliation. That’s the way things work in Syria now. Washington and lackeys, including their ‘democratic’ forces of ISIL and Al-Qaeda, no longer have the upper hand in the war-torn country. The irredeemably flawed and deeply harmful US coalition and their generals no longer have the strength to impose obligations and limit choice, a position affirmed with the collapse of the ‘American Caliphate’ in the Levant.

The warmongering hordes are way off the line to assume that the Syria they are preparing to attack is the one they invaded seven years ago - with much needed help from well-endowed, well-trained, well-equipped terror proxies, Saudi cash, and American air support. How to explain this? The new US coalition won’t be able to get the job done in any conceivable way.

847/940