Source: Fars News
The United States army supported a Saudi airstrike that hit a bus carrying schoolchildren in Sa’ada, Northern Yemen On August 9.

The students were on a recreational trip. According to the Sa’ada health department, the heartbreaking attack killed at least 51 people. Also according to the International Committee of the Red Cross, at least 40 of those killed were school children, and tens of others were wounded, again mostly children.

If this kind of behavior in the conduct of armed conflict is not the very concept of war crime we don’t know what is. As per The Hague Conventions adopted in 1907, warring parties cannot use certain means and methods of warfare. Notably the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and the two 1977 Additional Protocols also focus on the protection of persons not taking part in hostilities. Both Hague Law and Geneva Law identify several of the violations of its norms in the ongoing US-backed, Saudi-led war on Yemen as war crimes. These war crimes can be found in both international humanitarian law and international criminal law treaties, as well as in international customary law as well.

Moreover, the 1949 Geneva Conventions have been ratified by the United States and Saudi Arabia. Many of the rules contained in these treaties have been considered as part of customary law and, as such, are binding on all those countries that have waged an illegal war on the poorest country in the Arab world.

Given what happened on August 9 in Sa’ada, Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has jurisdiction in respect of US-backed, Saudi war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes that are specifically, deliberately and willfully designed to target school children and populated areas in Yemen.

Other breaches include destruction of property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention, torture and inhuman treatment of Yemenis in UAE-run prisons, an illegal blockade that is willfully causing great suffering for millions of civilians in besieged cities and communities, extensive destruction and wanton appropriation of schools, hospitals and installations, and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population.

The important part here is that the United States army has had a heavy hand in all this. The US is supporting the Saudis to commit these grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions in the knowledge that such attacks will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which are clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.

Since the illegal invasion in August of 2015, the US has further sold the Saudis precision-guided munitions; funneled tanks, planes, bombs, and targeting intelligence to Saudi defense officials; and provided material support during bombing runs. Despite increasing reports documenting repeated targeting of Yemeni civilians by Saudi warplanes, with new UN estimates that over 17,000 people have been killed, the Trump administration still intends to resupply Riyadh’s arsenal.

These actions are as reprehensible as they are illegal. Weaponizing the Saudis and the multiple, repeated airstrikes on civilians supported by the US are war crimes. Hospitals, schools, markets and wedding parties are not legitimate military targets. The Americans are either intentionally helping the Saudis target civilians or are deliberately indifferent to the execution of such military operations – either case flies in the face of long-standing international standards of conduct.

Tragic as the August 9’s immoral and unlawful airstrike was, there will be no victory for Saudi Arabia and the United States in Yemen. The Americans have no justification to be there and certainly no reason to help Saudis murder innocent school kids in broad daylight either. As per the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the United States is complicit in this callous campaign of murder and destruction and the only clear outcome for the US government has to be further international condemnation, humiliation and shame.

There are international law obligations to accountability and transparency and the world community is expected to push the Saudis and their American partners to stop this madness, to end their wanton disregard for civilian lives, and to be accountable on their crimes against humanity in Yemen.

Source: Tim Anderson FB
Thank you to the organisers and thank you Hashd al Shaabi (Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Forces). I want to extend my recognition of the Martyrs who fell in defence of this country when it was invaded by the US-led force, when it was destabilised by western powers, and when western powers got behind terrorist groups to further destabilise this country.

It is very important to talk about the sponsorship of terrorism, I believe, because as the war is being won against DAESH in Syria and Iraq, the terrorism persists and may still persist after the war is won, and the sponsorship of terrorism is the key to that: Can the war against terrorism be won after the country is liberated? Now, I know that some people are going to focus on the social background, context of terrorism, the ideology …but if they forget those who are providing finance and weapons to these groups, they are going to miss something very important. That is why I am going to focus on the role of the United States of America in Iraq, and in this region, as the principal sponsor of terrorism in the entire region.

I wrote an article two years ago saying that all of the terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq have been directly or indirectly sponsored by the United States of America. Of course evidence and reason are one important way of discussion, but that is not what determines political debate. Political debate is conditioned by consistent repetition of particular lines and particular myths. And of course, there is intimidation of voices that tend to counter those myths.

So I think it is important for us, particularly those of us who aren’t diplomats, to speak more directly about these issues because if not the same mistakes will be made.

I want to look at the role of the United States in supporting terrorism in this region as though it were a criminal prosecution. That is to say, where evidence is led about the two principal elements of the crime: one is the intention or the mental element and the other is the act, the actual act of involvement in terrorism. And of course we also have to take the regional look at this problem because for the last decade and a half we had wars and terrorism in six countries in this region, so given that context Iraq can’t be considered alone.

If we look at the mental element, the guilty mind, the ‘mens rea’ of the British legal system, we see that there has been a plan to dominate this country and its neighbours that goes back many, many years. The thought or the idea of a new Middle East – that was articulated more clearly after this country had been subjugated and invaded – in 2005 and 2006 is on public record. There were also plans to use sectarian violence in this country, to prevent a close relationship between Baghdad and Teheran, between neighbours, to try to block that constructive relationship; and that has a long history too. There is widespread evidence of control and integration of all of the regional terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, for example, by use of US intelligence through its allies in the region, in particular, the al-Saud regime, Qatar and the government of Turkey.

There are admissions by senior US officials of strategic support for DAESH in Syria. You know for example, in late, no, in mid 2012 that the US DIA said that the construction of an Islamic state in Eastern Syria and Western Iraq was exactly, quote “exactly” what the US and its allies wanted in order to weaken the ‘regime’ in Damascus. We know that there are repeated, demonstrable lies over the pretext for the US re-entering this country, on the invitation of the Iraqi government, nevertheless a pretext (was) to be fighting DAESH.
And that follows on the earlier false pretext of the invasion. After the invasion this idea of a New Middle East and ‘constructive chaos’ was announced in Tel Aviv just prior to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, which of course was defeated. We know that in Libya the situation was different. The Libyan State was destroyed by a NATO invasion, and the Salafist terrorists in that country, linked to DAESH, were directly linked to senior US officials. And they haven’t been ashamed by showing themselves photographed giving awards to the leaders of DAESH in Libya.

We know Seymour Hersh wrote about the ‘redirection’ in 2006 of the Bush Administration. We know that Al Qaeda in Iraq which became ISI, which became ISIS, became heavily internationalised in the year 2006. The main component of that internationalised force worked from Saudi Arabia, followed by North Africa and other countries. We know that DAESH fought with the Free Syrian Army, together, for a period of time in Northern Syria. We know the head of the US armed forces admitted, at the time of the US, let’s say reoccupation of this country, militarily, on the pretext of fighting DAESH, that the then head of the US army Mark Dempsey admitted that their “key Arab allies” were financing DAESH. We know that the (US) Vice President said that their key allies in the region were financing DAESH and all of the other groups to try and overthrow the government in Damascus.

The guilty acts, the guilty acts involved the overt weapons supply to the principal direct sponsors of DAESH. We know that the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration, the Trump Administration have sold increasing amounts of weapons, to the al Saud regime and Qatar in an increasing spiral, that is to say Obama sold more than Bush and Trump has been selling more than Obama. We know that the ideology and weapons have come from, from those countries. We know that the US even accuses Qatar of being a sponsor of terrorism.

The indirect supply of weapons, I was in Deir Ezzor two weeks ago, I saw a large cache of NATO weapons there, there were weapons from all over, some of those have come from this country DAESH brought them into Syria, including a NATO howitser with a 40km range, a whole range of technology that the Syrian Army captured.

We know that there have been reports of direct US assistance to DAESH commanders in this country and in Syria. The reports began in late 2014 and carry to 2015 where a number of senior Iraqi officials are complaining about the US using helicopters, for example, to remove DAESH commanders from one part to another. I spoke to a Syrian General in Deir Ezzor two weeks ago, he told me the same thing had happened down in the Euphrates in Deir Ezzor. They had three coordinates with US pick ups of DAESH commanders being evacuated as DAESH was being defeated by the Syrian Arab Army and its allies.

We know the omissions that took place that there was, while the US and the government of my country (Australia) pretended they were in this country and they were operating in Syria to fight DAESH, when in fact they mounted a brutal attack on Syrian soldiers just over a year ago, on a low mountain range south of Deir Ezzor, killing 123 soldiers, claiming it was a mistake. The same day DAESH took over that mountain range with the aim of trying to take the airport in Deir Ezzor.
I spoke with a survivor, a commanding officer of the Syrian Army two weeks ago and he told in detail how that the attack of five planes, including a line of sight machine gunning of Syrian soldiers on that mountain range, took place. At the same time United States forces bombed bridges going north to Raqqa and going East, sorry, going West to Tadmor. The US forces there to fight DAESH did nothing to prevent DAESH taking over the city of Tadmor, or Palmyra. In fact they actively assisted DAESH in Deir Ezzor, we have very clear evidence of that.

So when we look at that evidence, and we have to I suggest as reasonable people look at that evidence, there is an overwhelming case for the US role in masterminding these terrorist groups for its broader political strategy in this region.

Why is this important? It’s important because if we are going to have conversations about the post war situation and the reconstruction of Iraq, and we have broad general ideas of the international community being involved in that, we have to think: why would rational people invite those who have destroyed this country, destabilised it, thrown it into terrorism, to play a leading role in the reconstruction of this country. It deserves serious thought, I suggest.

Now I am not going to tell Iraqi people what to do because there are too many westerners who have been doing that for too long. But I just suggest that those who invited the wolf into their house have to find ways to get the wolf out. Many of us have diplomatic roles, but I suggest that the rest of us can and should talk more directly and honestly about who is behind terrorism in Iraq, and in this entire region. Thank you.

Tim Anderson’s presentation at the Baghdad Conference ‘Conference for International Dialogue on Terrorism’, 28 October 2017. Hosted by Hashd al Shaabi (Popular Mobilisation Forces), under the Office of the Prime Minister of Iraq.

By Adam Garrie
Source: The Duran
Local Kurdish language media in Syria have reported that both the Russian Aerospace Forces and the Syrian Arab Air-force have bombed positions of the Kurdish led US proxy militia SDF, in Deir ez-Zor, as originally reported in English by Al-Masdar.

While the reports are not yet confirmed by Syria or Russia, the Russian Defense Ministry recently stated that if the Kurdish led US proxy militia SDF continues to attack Syrian and Russian positions, Russia would not hesitate to target the SDF. Syria has also said that they will target the SDF as an enemy force if they continue to prevent the liberation of Syrian territory by the Syrian Arab Army.

Today’s unconfirmed reports from Kurdish media also comes less than 24 hours after the Russian Defense Ministry released photos showing battlefield collusion between ISIS, SDF and US special forces in Deir ez-Zor.

Yesterday, Russia confirmed the death of Lieutenant-General Valeriy Asapov, who was martyred in Deir ez-Zor after his position was shelled by ISIS terrorists.

While the story of Russia and Syria targeting the SDF is still unconfirmed, the story is similar to a previous report wherein, Russia shelled ISIS positions in Deir-ez Zor and hit SDF fighters. This was yet another sign of battle field collusion between the SDF and ISIS. The only way that SDF fighters could have been hit in the previous attack, is if they were in the same positions as ISIS fighters. Today’s events could be a similar scenario.

Russia shines light on the shady anti-Syrian coalition of the US, Kurds and jihadists
Russia has made a statement with only two logical conclusions: Either the US and its Kurdish proxies are lying about the nature of an alleged strike on SDF positions or otherwise, the Kurdish led SDF is embedded among ISIS.

Russia has rejected claims from the United States and their Kurdish led proxy militants SDF that the Russian Aerospace Forces along with the Syrian Arab Air force targeted an SDF position in Deir ez-Zor East of the Euphrates.

Legally speaking, the entire argument it moot as Syria has declared the SDF an illegal group and therefore a legitimate target as Syria works with its legal partners to liberate Syria. Syria has said openly it will fight the SDF if necessary in the battle to liberate Syria from all illegitimate forces. Hence the notion of some sort of agreement between the SDF and Syria, tenuous as it always was, can now be confirmed as ‘fake news’ or perhaps better put, wishful speculation by pro-Kurdish elements.

However, in practical terms, it highlights the very real possibility that as ISIS continues to dwindle as a formidable military force, Syria and Kurdish militants may very likely come into increasingly intense conflicts in a ‘rush for territory’ in formerly ISIS occupied parts of what is legal Syrian territory, even as Russia seeks to prevent further clashes without directly interfering in Syrian affairs. In this sense Russia’s ability to stop such clashes is self-limiting due to Russia’s respect for the realities of international law. More

Source: NEO

Lately we’ve been witnessing an ever increasing number of reports and non-conspiratorial facts that expose an alliance that exists between Western liberals and jihadists. It’s hardly a secret that in Libya NATO fought a war on behalf of al-Qaeda and other radical groups to topple the legitimate government of what used to be the most prosperous and stable African state. Countries like Britain even used their intelligence services to help bring latent jihadists, some of whom were under police surveillance, in a bid to topple the government of Muammar Gaddafi.

Even today such states as the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Netherlands, and Belgium are not just sponsoring radical militants across the Middle East and arming them, they are effectively providing close air support to radical forces in Syria, while helping the Saudis to aid the Wahhabist cause in Yemen.

A prominent alternative media source The Duran would note:

ISIS and al-Qaeda want to destroy secular, progressive, modern Arab governments whether Ba’athist, Nasserist or in the case of Libya one based on the Third International Theory–western leaders want the same. Jihadists believe it is their duty to replace secular governments with theocracy–western leaders back them up. Countries like secular France, Israel, Germany the US and UK don’t like to talk about the fact that Libya was a secular state with mass literacy, women’s rights, protections and safety for black people and high living standards.

Western government have been providing all sorts of assistance to radical terrorists right under our noses, acting on the pretext that they are assisting non-existent moderate rebels groups. In reality certain detachment of ISIS would pretend to be member of the so-called opposition forces in the morning, only to butcher civilians by hundreds in the evening. It comes as no surprise that recently the Salon magazine would publish a detailed report of the crimes against humanity committed by the so-called ‘moderate rebels’ in Syria, since there’s a long list of those being committed on the daily basis.

The efforts undertaken by governments, special services, civil society institutions of the Western world to support those so-called ‘moderate forces’ will inevitably lead to the continuation of the string of terrorist attacks in Western states, leading to the ever growing hatred that most Europeans have recently experienced towards Muslims.

The divide between various social and religious groups across the EU will become even deeper with every new terrorist attack. This development will transform those Muslims who have nothing in common with radical militants into outcasts, that are going to be unwelcome in most any European state. This will make the attempts to radicalize those groups that are being routinely taken by ISIS into a pretty simple task.

This means that after some time the Islamic State will become capable of enlisting enough outcasts to create a rouge army in the EU. The question is where will this army launch a jihad against the infidels in the Middle East or in Europe itself?

The ideas voiced by certain individual experts about the need to put an end to the exodus of Muslims from the conflict zones in the Middle East and North Africa look delusional at best. Judge for yourself, no European state will agree to invest massive financial resources in the rebuilding the destroyed economies of Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, in a bid to create more or less decent living conditions for local residents that are fleeing their home towns in search for a better life in Europe.

Therefore, the ongoing fighting in those regions will only lead to an increase in the level of radicalization among local young people, who forced into exile and deprived of the decent and humane treatment that any individual is entitled to get.

The programs aimed at the de-radicalization introduced by a number of EU countries, in fact, are not only falling short of the expected effect, but just fail. This is especially true of the program of de-radicalization of French youth, that was adopted last May. Its failure is being manifested by the reports of two members of the French Senate: Esther Benbassa and Catherine Troendlé. Those ladies drafted a document that goes under the title of “Désendoctrinement, désensbrigadement et réinsertion des djihadistes en France et en Europe.” In short, this report subjects the attempts create centers of to deradicalization taken by the French government to an extensive amount of criticism, since local authorities have not simply failed to achieve their stated goals, but compromised the very idea of creating such centers.

Therefore, it is only logical that an ever increasing number of experts in various countries of the world has come to grips with the fact that the military defeat of ISIS in Syria and Iraq will not put an end to the string of terrorist attacks in Europe. That is why the problem of radicalization is, above all, the problem of European societies, and it must be solved in Europe. The Die Presse, for instance, seems convinced that it’s the only hope the EU has to put an end to the problem of terrorism.

For Germany, the defeats that the Islamic State is suffering in Syria is major security risk, since the more pressure is exerted on jihadists, the higher the threat of terrorist attacks in Western Europe, notes Christoph Wanner, a correspondent for the German TV channel N24.

That is why today the European political forces, just like their colleagues from across the ocean, must take decisive efforts in a bid put an end to radicalization of local Muslim communities and counter the spread of ISIS’ poisonous ideology.

Grete Mautner is an independent researcher and journalist from Germany, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Source: RT
Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has called on the US to put an end to the “illegal war” she believes it wages in Syria after visiting Damascus and Aleppo. During her trip, she spoke with civilians, religious leaders, opposition leaders, and President Assad.

Gabbard described her privately-funded seven-day trip to Lebanon and Syria as a “fact-finding mission” to learn the truth about the war by speaking directly to the Syrian people. The itinerary was kept secret until Gabbard’s return to the US for security reasons.

Gabbard travelled to Beirut, and then to Damascus and Aleppo, where she spoke with Syrian students, entrepreneurs, academics, and aid workers. She also received firsthand accounts of the conflict from refugees displaced by the war.

She met with a number of religious leaders, including The Grand Mufti of Syria Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun and Archbishop Denys Antoine Chahda, who heads the Syrian Catholic Church of Aleppo.

Gabbard also met with several leaders of the Syrian opposition who spearheaded anti-government protests in 2011. She says some of them believe that the originally peaceful uprising was hijacked by jihadists “funded and supported by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, the United States.”

Contrary to the official US narrative that terrorist groups such as Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS, ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front could be “separated” from the moderate opposition which fights by their side, Gabbard said that the Syrian people she talked with do not distinguish between the various militant groups.

“Their message to the American people was powerful and consistent: There is no difference between ‘moderate’ rebels and al-Qaeda (al-Nusra) or ISIS — they are all the same,” Gabbard said, describing the essence of the Syrian conflict as “a war between terrorists under the command of groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda and the Syrian government.”

Gabbard confessed she lacked any plausible explanations to offer the Syrian people about the role of the US in the lingering conflict, as she was asked questions like: “Why is the United States and its allies helping al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups try to take over Syria? Syria did not attack the United States. Al-Qaeda did.”

The Syrian people caught in this war “cry out for the U.S. and other countries to stop supporting those who are destroying Syria and her people,” Gabbard wrote in a blog post, adding that it is the message they asked her to convey to the world, as it has been constantly muted by “one-sided biased reports pushing a narrative that supports this regime change war at the expense of Syrian lives.”

The Congresswoman revealed upon her return that she had also met with Syrian President Bashar Assad, noting that she was not originally planning to meet him, but could not pass up the opportunity in hopes of making a difference. She did not elaborate on the details of the meeting.

“If we profess to truly care about the Syrian people, about their suffering, then we’ve got to be able to meet with anyone that we need to if there is a possibility that we can achieve peace,” Gabbard told CNN’s Jake Tapper.

Brushing off criticism over the perceived ethical issues that might arise from the meeting, Gabbard said that dialogue is an indispensable prerequisite on the road to any peaceful settlement.

“Whatever you think about President Assad, the fact is that he is the president of Syria,” Gabbard said, stressing that “in order for any possibility of a viable peace agreement to occur there has to be a conversation with him.”

An Iraq War veteran and member of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, Gabbard is known for her sharp criticism of former US President Barack Obama’s interventionist policy in the Middle East.

Her Syria trip became a talking point within the US establishment immediately after it was announced, with some pundits alleging she intends to cozy up to the Syrian government.

In December, Gabbard introduced the Stop Arming Terrorists Act, designed to prevent the US government from providing direct assistance to terrorist groups and to “prohibit the Federal government from funding assistance to countries that are directly or indirectly supporting those terrorist groups.

“We must stop directly and indirectly supporting terrorists—directly by providing weapons, training and logistical support to rebel groups affiliated with al-Qaeda and ISIS; and indirectly through Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and Turkey, who, in turn, support these terrorist groups”, Gabbard wrote.

Gabbard believes Washington should shift its approach from attempting to overthrow the Syrian government to actually combating terrorist groups. She says the US has been repeating the same foreign policy pattern “from Iraq to Libya and now in Syria,” with its pursuit of regime change which, she argues, has only brought about “unimaginable suffering, devastating loss of life” and contributed to “the strengthening of groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS.”

“I return to Washington, DC with even greater resolve to end our illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government,” Gabbard wrote in her blog post.

Source: nsnbc
By Finian Cunningham (SCF) : As Syrians gather in their capital Damascus to celebrate, there is a sense that the New Year will bring a measure of peace – the first time such hope has been felt over the past five years of war in the country.

Russia’s military intervention to help its Arab ally at the end of September has been the seminal event of the year. After three months of sustained Russian aerial operations in support of the Syrian Arab Army against an array of foreign-backed mercenaries, there is an unmistakable sense that the «terrorist backbone has been broken», as Russian President Vladimir Putin recently put it.

This past week sees several local truces being implemented across Syria with evacuation of militants from towns which they have held under armed siege. The civilian populations in these locations have been effectively held hostage as human shields by the militants, thus preventing Syrian army advances up to now. The Western media, such as US government-owned Voice of America, invert reality by claiming that it is the mercenaries themselves who have been under siege from the Syrian army instead of the fact that the mercenaries have been holding civilians in their midst as hostages, as was the case earlier in the siege of Homs, which was eventually also broken.

What has changed dramatically is the advent of Russian air power – over 5,000 sorties in three months – which has enabled the Syrian army to wipe out militant bases, oil smuggling and weapons supply routes in northern Syria along the Turkish border. This has left militants further inland to wither from the severance of supply lifelines. Hence the readiness now to accept truces and evacuation deals – under the auspices of the United Nations and International Committee for the Red Cross.

Thousands of anti-government insurgents are being bussed out of locations around Damascus, including Zabadani, al Qadam, Hajar al Aswad and Yarmouk.

An air strike reportedly by Russia forces killing the commander of the Jaish al-Islam militant group, Zahran Alloush, in the Damascus suburb of East Ghouta, dealt a devastating blow to morale among the self-styled jihadists. Alloush was reportedly killed along with several other commanders. That strike translates into «the game is up».

What is interesting is how the Western news media are reporting all this. Their reportage of the truces and evacuations are straining to minimize the context of these developments. This BBC report is typical, headlined: «Syria fighters’ evacuation from Zabadani ‘under way’».

The British state-owned broadcaster tells of hundreds of «fighters» being relocated from the town of Zabadani as if the development just magically materialized like a present donated by Santa Claus. What the BBC fails to inform is that that truce, as with several others around Damascus, has come about because of Russia’s strategic military intervention in Syria dealing crushing blows against the militant networks. The Western media have preoccupied themselves instead with claims from the US State Department that Russia’s military operations have either been propping up the «Assad regime» or allegedly targeting «moderate rebels» and civilians.

The disingenuous Western narrative, or more prosaically «propaganda», then, in turn, creates a conundrum when widespread truces and evacuations are being implemented. That obviously positive development signaling an end to conflict thanks to Russia’s military intervention has to be left unexplained or unacknowledged by the Western media because it negates all their previous pejorative narrative towards Russia and the Assad government.

Furthermore, the Western media are obliged to be coy about the exact identity of the «fighters» being evacuated. As noted already, the militants are variously described by the Western media in sanitized terms as «fighters» or «rebels». But more informative regional and local sources, such as Lebanon’s Al Manar, identify the brigades as belonging to the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State group and al-Nusra Front. These are terror groups, as even defined by Washington and the European Union. So, the Western media has to, by necessity, censor itself from telling the truth by peddling half-truths and sly omissions.

The Jaish al-Islam (Army of Islam), whose commander was killed, is also integrated with the al-Qaeda terror network. Jaish al-Islam is funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and serves as a conduit for American CIA weapons to the more known terrorist outlets. Notably, Voice of America referred to the terror commander Zahran Alloush with the euphemistic cleansing term as a «rebel leader».

What the Russian-precipitated truces and termination of sieges is demonstrating is that the western side of Syria, from Daraa in the south, through Damascus and up to the northern Mediterranean Sea coast around Aleppo and Latakia, are infested with the terror brigades of IS and Al-Nusra and their myriad offshoots.

Western media have repeatedly accused Russia of conducting air strikes against «moderate rebels» and not the IS brigades, which they claim, were concentrated in the east of Syria. It is true that the IS is strongly based in eastern cities of Raqqa and Deir Ezzor, from where its oil smuggling operations are mounted.

Russia has stepped up its air strikes on IS smuggling routes in eastern Syria with devastating results. But also integral to the air operations is the cutting off of weapons routes in the northwest to fuel the insurgents along the entire western flank, including around Damascus.

The surrender of the various mercenary brigades and the breaking of sieges around Damascus is vindication of Russia’s military tactics; and also its narrative about the nature of the whole conflict in Syria.

The Western notion of «moderate rebels» and «extremists» is being exposed as the nonsense that it is. And so Western media are compelled to evacuate any meaningful context from their coverage of recent events in Syria.

Riad Haddad, Syria’s ambassador to Russia, spoke the plain truth in recent days when he said: «We are at a turning point in the Syrian army operations against terrorists – namely the transition from defense to attack… [because of] the effective work of the Russian air force in Syria». But the ambassador’s comments were scarcely, if at all, reported in the Western media. Simply because those words vindicate Russia’s military intervention and its general policy towards Syria.

Also missing or downplayed in the Western media coverage of the truces across Syria is the question of where the surrendering mercenaries are being evacuated to. They are not being bussed to other places inside Syria. That shows that there is no popular support for these insurgents. Despite copious Western media coverage contriving that the Syrian conflict is some kind of «civil war» between a despotic regime and a popular pro-democracy uprising, the fact that surrendering militants have no where to go inside Syria patently shows that these insurgents have no popular base.

In other words, this is a foreign-backed war on Syria; a covert war of aggression on a sovereign country utilizing terrorist proxy armies.

So where are the terrorist remnants being shipped to? According to several reports, the extremists are being given safe passage into Turkey, where they will receive repair and sanctuary from the President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – and no doubt subsidized by the European Union with its $3.5 billion in aid to Ankara to «take care of refugees».

Again, this is another indictment of the state-terrorist links of NATO-member Turkey, which the EU is recently giving special attention to for accession to the bloc.

Russia is not only vindicated in Syria. The Western governments, their media and their regional client regimes are being flushed out like the bandits on the ground in Syria.

If the UN-sponsored peace process due to start in the New Year succeeds to end the conflict in Syria, it will be largely down to Russia’s military campaign that has wiped out the terrorist proxies working on behalf of the Western criminal enterprise for regime change in that country.

Finian Cunningham, Strategic Culture Foundation