The West's Lust for Blood and Destruction in Syria

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

I am not one of those who has ever wavered at the threshold of any Arab regime; I have always considered the Arab regimes the greatest danger facing the Arab nation since the emergence of the modern Arab state, and I have always held that toppling these regimes is a sacred duty and a necessary precondition if the Arab peoples, individually, and the nation, collectively, are ever to advance. This is why, for more than thirty years, I never hesitated to warn of the Arab blood that would be spilled in the streets of Arab cities.

What has happened in Syria has not departed from the expected historical course, given that the regime grew despotic, tyrannical, and unjust. But what I see now is no longer consistent with that historical trajectory — indeed, it often contradicts it outright. Rather than correcting course toward development and modernization, and toward the emergence of a new Syrian citizen who participates in decision-making and contributes to building society and state with effectiveness, confidence, and high resolve, what is now expected is the destruction of Syria and the extinguishing of the vitality and capacities of the Syrian people for a long period of time.

It is clear that those who began the movement for political change have a problem: they have lost control over their own movement and over their own independent national decision-making, and have found themselves falling, gradually, into the hands of external powers, whether consciously or unconsciously. What I see in Syria now is not a popular movement working diligently toward change, but an arena for an international conflict fueled by the Syrian people and Syrian installations and property. I see no political, security, social, or media programs put forward by the opposition in Syria; what I see does not go beyond combat equipment and the urgent demand, from the Western bloc that calls itself “the international community,” for military intervention or for placing Syria under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. I see no proposals from the opposition, in all its factions, for extricating Syria from its impasse and achieving smooth, seamless political change — what I see, instead, is a lust for blood, destruction, and ruin.

Military Intervention

It was tragic to hear Syrians demanding that Western states intervene militarily in Syria to bring down the regime. The idea itself is terrifying, and betrays either a complete absence of vision or a betrayal of nation, of the wider Arab and Islamic community, and of religion. Is it reasonable for a revolutionary seeking freedom to demand military intervention by states that have trampled our freedoms, torn our countries apart, killed our children, mocked our history and our religious and moral values, violated our sanctities and our holy places and our Palestine? Are the treacherous, contemptible states of the West, which colonized our lands and destroyed our people, fit to be entrusted with the freedom of the Arab human being? And can whoever entrusts them with it possibly be classified as a revolutionary, zealous for Arab freedom and for the freedom of the Syrian citizen?

These “revolutionaries” did not believe, at first, the claim that NATO could not attack Syria, that the Syrian army was not Libya’s army; they did not believe that the United States was incapable of throwing itself into a battle with no foreseeable end. They failed to read the lessons well, and it is a matter of regret that even a great thinker like Dr. Burhan Ghalioun was overtaken by such ignorance, setting his own learning aside, imagining that the people of the West possess the treasures of knowledge. He and his companions were repeatedly warned to be wary of the position they had put themselves in, but such illusions continue to pursue them still.

The West does not dare attack Syria militarily, and it has, in any case, no interest in such a step. But it is now interested in Chapter VII of the UN Charter, hoping it might provide Turkey an international justification for military intervention, funded by Arab money. If it manages to construct international cover for Turkey, it will guarantee the outbreak of a ferocious war between Syria and Turkey that drains both states, along with the money of the oil states and of Iran. In other words, the West is trying to repeat the experience of the Iran-Iraq War, in order to wear down both sides at once. Turkey is a Muslim state — let its wealth and its sons go to hell, and Syria’s along with it — while the Arab money, in the end, finds its way into the coffers of Western arms manufacturers.

[…] before pushing toward military escalation. Turkey may well be enticed by some financial inducements from the Arab oil states, but it must understand clearly that this money does not lie under Arab sovereignty, and that it is the West, in the end, that decides how Arab money is spent.

From here, in order to engineer the pretexts for a Syrian-Turkish war, the largest possible quantities of weapons and equipment must be smuggled into Syria, so that the waterfall of blood keeps pouring and the destruction remains unbroken. And this is precisely the beautiful, splendid spectacle that the leaders of Tel Aviv, Washington, London, and Paris relish. And here I say to everyone: this same West, so generous with weapons and money toward the Syrians (at the expense of the oil states, of course), denies the Palestinians so much as a single bullet casing. It does not merely deny them the bullet — it denies them even the casing, lest they catch the scent of gunpowder and the scent of freedom and liberation rise up in their heads. And just as the people of the West have installed Palestinians to hunt down the free men of the Palestinian people, tomorrow they will install leaders of the external opposition to hunt down the free men of Syria.

Syria is teeming with free men, and has always held its head high through its brave and valiant sons, and there are, right now, those who are true revolutionaries against the regime, sincerely convinced of the cause of Syria’s freedom and the freedom of the Syrian citizen. Among these revolutionaries are those who fight out of genuine faith and in pursuit of a noble, great goal, unconvinced that the regime is serious about what it says regarding reform. But the Palestinian experience shows that the revolutionaries who were most valiant in confronting Israel became the ones most hunted down by the Palestinian Authority that emerged from the womb of Western policy. And if there are, among Syria’s revolutionaries now, those who imagine that the West’s assistance will lead to their taking the reins of the country, they need to review the history of these states calmly, without wishful thinking. The people of the West do not want revolutionaries who will liberate the Golan, achieve self-sufficiency, march toward Arab and Muslim unity, and catch up with the caravan of world civilization; what they want are tools to carry out Western policy and Israel’s, in exchange for a bit of tasty fodder.

The Observers

The clear and obvious proof of what I am saying lies in the observer missions that the people of the West decided upon, directly or indirectly. The first contingent was made up of Arabs, on the pretense that the Arab League — falsely — was the party making the decisions. The observers’ work did not please the regimes of the West, so the Arabs decided to end their mission. It was clear that the purpose of sending them had been to falsify the facts on the ground, and their mission became unnecessary the moment the idea of honesty began to hover over their heads.

The international observers arrived with a mandate from the UN Security Council. And just as happened with the Arab observer mission, so it happened with the UN mission. Is what is required, then, a mission that works to inflame internal conflict and heighten tensions across the region? Yes.

The Solution

It seems to me that the Western equation focuses on the following: is it possible to drag the Arabs, the Turks, and the Iranians into a war of attrition without inflicting any damage on Israel? There is a good opportunity here for the West and Israel to weaken Syria, both people and army; an opportunity to drag the Turks into a tragedy that drains what they have built militarily and economically; and an opportunity to drag the Iranians toward targets far removed from the American ships in the Gulf. Can these opportunities be seized, on condition that Israel remains a happy spectator to all this throat-slitting and squandering of wealth?

I proposed a solution about a year ago, and I return now to repeat it:

Would the regime and the internal Syrian opposition accept the arbitration of a committee of Arab intellectuals and thinkers known for their loyalty to the nation and their commitment to its independence, its progress, and the dignity of its people? We have no need of a Security Council, a United Nations, or states friendly or hostile to Syria. The nation has minds enough, and more, to address every problem and concern, gradually, according to systematic, scholarly foundations that take into account the interests of the nation as a whole.

Would both sides accept the arbitration of such a committee, whose membership they would agree upon together? I note that I have already put forward names from several Arab countries, and received no positive response from either side. I hope that, by now, the wounds have softened these positions.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “شهوة الغرب للدماء والدمار في سوريا” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.