The Hidden Reasons Behind The Dirty War In Syria
When scanning through the latest events online, it’s hard to not learn about the current conflict in Syria and the massive influx of refugees entering Europe. The Syrian war is everywhere but substantial discussions on the issue are lacking and the public seems to have a limited and even biased understanding of the conflict. Throughout this article, I would like to provide some clarification, tapping into the relevant information shared by independent journalists.
After Saddam Hussein’s fall in 2003, this part of the Middle East was under instability and extremist groups started to gain momentum. ISIS was only a small sect before the beginning of the Iraqi conflict, but the organization has grown significantly since the intervention led by the US and the UK to pirate oil wells in the region. A part of the local population, often humble citizens victims of the bombings, terrified and oppressed by the Western attacks, joined fundamentalist groups and were indoctrinated by anti-Western speeches. Now let us not forget that in a country that had never been in contact with the jihadist movement, 700,000 civilians were killed during the Iraq war. ISIS is the result of those in Washington and London who destroyed Iraq as both a state and a society. The message shared by western media has us conclude that the devil is raging in the Middle East, but as explained by the war journalist John Pilger: “humanity’s most dangerous enemy resides across the Atlantic“.
The war in Syria was prepared several years before the 2011 Arab spring, especially by the British services as clearly explained by the former French Minister of Foreign Affairs Roland Dumas. In addition, documents shared via WikiLeaks have revealed that the United States had been preparing an attack since 2006 requested by Israel. However, the message shared in the media leads us to believe that the conflict takes its roots in the uprising of people against the dictatorship of Bashar Assad, a revolution in the name of freedom to overthrow a totalitarian regime. Seems credible, right? But don’t be fooled: this strategy was on the agendas in London and Washington so that Western nations could then intervene in Syria for reasons that are obviously much more economic than humanitarian: Syria is a strategic region of the world, especially for the gas distribution to Europe via Turkey. Today, Russia is the European Union’s main supplier of gas, but the Persian Gulf contains the world’s largest reserve and Iran, Iraq and Syria can change that story together. And here is where Western states come into play: they want to intervene in Syria and thus control policies in place. In the same line, we were recently told that Iran was preparing weapons of mass destruction and international sanctions were inevitable, which was purely a lie. And in addition to gas, oil reserves are plentiful in the region so nations that put their hands on the wells will control the distribution of black gold and inevitably strengthen their world domination. Let’s face it: it is first and foremost our appetite for fossil energy that is the source of all conflicts in Middle East.
What is particularly deplorable and disappointing is our collective naivety regarding this war. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya … despite a story that constantly repeats itself, we still believe that Western states intervene in countries occupied by terrorists for the sake of freedom and democracy to liberate oppressed people. We struggle at stepping back from the messages broadcast by the media; we fail at connecting the dots with previous conflicts and make the right conclusions on our own. Few understand that public opinion is manipulated by propaganda created by the system where key information about these conflicts is omitted, voluntarily or not. Yet it is the return on investment and profit seeking that motivates Western governments to go to war. If not, why are Western nations still waiting to intervene in North Korea, a country where people’s freedom has been so scorned for decades? Unfortunately, we prefer the “official” explanations — even if they sometimes lack coherence — because they reassure us, make us feel better about ourselves and make us proud of our country. Have in mind though that the UK is 34th in the international ranking for press freedom, the United States 49th; when we realize the impact of these nations on the international scene, we could have all expected to see them at least in the top 10…
The biased story we believe in is notably comfortable because it allows us to forget that ultimately we are all responsible for these conflicts. By meeting our needs within the traditional economic system, we participate in the massive use of fossil fuels. This economy needs more and more energy to support its infinite growth and creates a perpetual demand for raw materials. To ensure the supply, frequent interventions in strategic areas of the world are necessary. These disguised colonialist practices constitute the main source of conflict in the world today and the damages will continue as long as we maintain our resource-devouring lifestyle.
Looking forward to reading your thoughts on these sensitive issues.
Originally published at thomaspichon.com.