Editorial

Syria’s Expulsion from Arab League could be a prelude to US/NATO intervention in Syria
By Dr. Syed M. Inayatullah Andrabi
Email: drandrabi@mahazi-islami.com

The Arab League has expelled Syria, apparently on account of the Syrian government’s brutal crackdown on anti government demonstrators. This is very significant move and dangerous consequences could follow. One has to take a fuller view of reality to grasp the political meaning of this move. Seen in isolation, the Arab League’s decisions would otherwise hardly merit attention, coming as they are, from a bunch of client regimes who when they meet each other, mostly talk about women and wine. This decision, however, is a very vital step towards the US strategic designs in the region, and without a tiniest fraction of doubt has been directly dictated by United States. Let us look at the whole picture now:

1) After the dismemberment of Ottoman state in 1923, the West’s colonial campaign of subjugating Muslim lands continued with the establishment of subservient Arab regimes, and the process reached its culmination when the Zionist entity ‘Israel’ was planted in the strategic heartland of Islam. From that day onwards, strengthening the Zionist entity has been the sole strategic objective of the West’s – and more visibly of the USA’s (it being the political-military leader of the West after World War-2) – policies in the region. That is because the Zionist entity was created in the first place to put a final seal on the West-created political order in the region, and functioning as its police post, to perpetuate that order. Unfortunately the West’s designs did not face any sustained and credible resistance, and the Zionist entity went on expanding. Not to speak of surrounding neighbours like Egypt and Syria who put up a brief but unsuccessful fight in 1967, but later caved in with Egypt signing the Camp David accords, the Palestine Liberation Organization – which was founded with the sole aim of reclaiming Palestine – also gave up its rightful claim signing the US-brokered Oslo accords in 1991. Thus it was a cakewalk for the colonial forces, with virtually no resistance to the West’s agenda in the Middle East.

2) The Islamic Revolution of Iran changed the whole picture: in the most basic and wide ranging sense it represented a credible and authentic challenge to the West’s global hegemony, and more specifically a strong voice of defiance against the blatantly pro-Israel agenda pursued by the West. The Islamic Republic took a principled stand against Zionism, and the Zionist entity – and upheld the right of Palestinian refugees to return to the homes they had been expelled from in 1948. The Islamic Republic opposed all the so-called peace moves/processes which only sought to legitimize the Zionist entity while giving empty promises to Palestinians. With Hamas in Gaza and Hizbollah in Lebanon, Israel for the first time, came across a new force, namely, the Islamic Movement, and as we witnessed in 2006 in Lebanon, and 2008 in Gaza, it suffered a humiliating defeat, and the myth of its invincibility owing largely to its victory in previous wars, came crashing down. The Islamic Movement has now become the main reality of the region while the PLO has been exposed as a bunch of treacherous thugs.

3) Things have moved much further, with the current uprisings in the Arab world changing the strategic landscape of the region. With Zionist collaborators like Hosni Mubarak of Egypt no longer around, Israel is headed for extremely difficult times. The peoples’ uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa are a very significant phenomenon. These uprisings are not, in a narrow sense of the term, engineered by Iran but are definitely inspired by the message of Islamic Revolution which in turn is going to decisively influence their future outcome. The Islamic Republic and its political role has already started shaping the political landscape of the region, leading to the emergence of a resistant politics, resisting the West-backed pro-Zionist agenda, as opposed to conformist politics which had hitherto dominated the political landscape and because of which the Zionist agenda had a free hand. As a result we now have a resistant politics represented by Islamic Movement led by the Islamic Republic of Iran, and a conformist politics represented by client Sheikhdoms led by the British created tribal clan, the Ale-Saud or the Saudi Kingdom. The former consider the Zionist entity as the source of all insecurity and instability in the region, whereas the latter consider Iran as the main ‘evil’ in the region.

4) As it follows from above, promoting the pro-Zionist agenda effectively means acting against the Islamic Movement and particularly its leading edge; the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is exactly what the West – in collaboration with its client regimes in the region (comprising the conformist camp) – is doing. We need to understand some vital facts here: First, Lebanon is absolutely important in this whole affair. Whether Lebanon remains a part of resistant politics, which it is now, or becomes a part of conformist politics will have a make or break effect on the political future of the region. Lebanon matters to the West in two important and inter-related ways: one, since it borders Israel so, for the security of the Zionist entity it has a crucial importance; two, Hizbollah has firmly established itself as a powerful player in Lebanese affairs, and at the same time it has deep ideological connections with Iran. Political analysts, when analyzing the costs a possible US invasion of Iran could involve, give much weight to Iran-Hizbollah strategic relationship considering it an important strategic edge Iran has in any conflict with USA/Israel. By engineering a change in Lebanon favourable to itself, United states will be killing two birds with one stone: It will be easing the Zionist entity of a resistant neighbourhood, and, simultaneously, depriving Iran of a strategic advantage which in turn will enhance US options in militarily dealing with Iran. Second, Syria is absolutely pivotal in determining the political role of Lebanon, and the route of bringing about a change in Lebanon goes through Syria. There are already Saudi moles like Saad Hariri in Lebanon who want to somehow curtail Hizbollah’s dominant position in Lebanese state affairs. If that happens resistant politics will be deprived of its most strategically important element.

5) The present Syrian government like other dynastic dinosaurs deserves to be wound up – and the sooner the better. But there are huge considerations here: it is not Libya or Tunisia. Syrian government is a part of the axis of resistance extending from Iran to Lebanon. Nobody cares about the Assad regime, but the functionality of this axis is a genuine matter of concern. There are clear evidences of brazen Saudi interference in Syria against the Assad regime. This is in sharp contrast to Saudi Arabia’s role in the present uprisings in the Arab world where they have stood against the people and with the tyrants. Zein-ul-Abidin Ben Ali, the ousted dictator of Tunisia is being sheltered by the Saudi Kingdom, Hosni Mubarak was offered refuge by them, Saudi ‘Ulema’- as expected- issued fatwas against public demonstrations, and above all the Kingdom militarily intervened for the regime and against people in neighbouring Bahrain. So what do we conclude from this? There is a foul agenda behind Assad’s removal, much fowler than the Assad regime itself. The people on the streets may not be a party to this, but those who are, are the ones who are calling the shots.

Looking at the whole picture as very briefly described above makes things easy to understand. Why did Arab League have to suspend Syria? Isn’t it a fact that League itself is mostly made up of dynastic dinosaurs? What moral right did the Qatari Sheikh, when announcing the decision of Syria’s suspension before the press, have? Does he know what people, or as the Noble Quran says ‘An-naas’ means? Their opinion; their rights; and their dignity? No, he doesn’t know any of this, nor does he need to know for the decision was directly dictated by the United States through their clients, the Ale-Saud.

Now what is the game-plan? Firstly to isolate Syria, next to build up a case for US/NATO military intervention and after that install a puppet regime and work for political change in Lebanon with a view to pushing Hizbollah to the fringes. That will pave the way for further action against the resistance politics and its fountainhead, the Islamic Movement led by Iran. But that, however, is a long but unfulfilled wish of the West despite the fact that ‘solving the problem’ of Iran by forcing it into submission has been at the top of the American agenda since the inception of Islamic Revolution in 1979. The 8 year imposed war by Saddam, sanctions, military missions, all have proved futile, and now with Saddam in grave, Hosni Mubarak on road, and the Saudi regime with a dynastic house of 22000 royals about to follow suit, the American ambition is doomed to fail.