Syria - The Wikileaks Files

<span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-weight:normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:
bold" lang="SL">Julian Assange: US &amp; Israel Planned To Overthrow Assad In 2006

Cables reveal that before the beginning of the
Syrian revolt and civil war, the United States hoped to overthrow Assad and
create strife between Shiite and Sunni Muslims.The only comprehensive analysis of the full archive of diplomatic
cables released by WikiLeaks – is an essential reference for
understanding the contours of American policy. For example, the current
war in Syria.
The US strategically schemed to cause unrest in Syria against the
Bashar al-Assad government. Faced with the rise of ISIS, which the US
was not only aware of but also,
the US slides deeper into a complicated war it helped escalate in the
first place, recently involving the once reluctant Turkey and as well.Dec 13, 2006

Influencing the SARG [Syrian government] in the End of 2006

William Roebuck, Chargé d’affaires, US embassy, Damascus;

We believe Bashar’s [Bashar-al-Assad, Syrian President] weaknesses
are in how he chooses to react to looming issues, both perceived and
real, such as the conflict between economic reform steps (however
limited) and entrenched, corrupt forces, the Kurdish question, and the
potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of
transiting Islamist extremists. This cable summarizes our assessment of
these vulnerabilities and suggests that there may be actions,
statements, and the signals that the USG can send that will improve the likelihood of such opportunities arising.” This cable suggests that the US goal in December 2006 was to undermine
the Syrian government by any available means, and that what mattered was
whether US action would help destabilize the government, not what other
impacts the action might have…In public, the US was opposed to
‘Islamist terrorists’ everywhere; but in private it saw the ‘potential
threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist
extremists’ as an ‘opportunity’ that the US should take action to try
to increase.US ally Turkey joined the supposed war against ISIS in Syria with
airstrikes and by allowing US to use its airbase in Icirlik along the
Syria-Turkey border. That clarifies
Turkey’s aims. While appearing to launch attacks on ISIS, Turkey
simultaneously targeted PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) in Iraq, the
parent-wing of the PYD (Democratic Union Party in Syria) consisting of
Syrian Kurds, who have been the main opposition to ISIS on-ground,
thereby alienating “”
In fact, Turkey’s airstrikes have disproportionately targeted PKK
rather than the ISS. And the US is not innocent here either.
US intelligence is used by Turkish warplanes to bomb
Kurdish villages where the PKK has a strong presence, killing many
civilians in the process.Of the,
847 are accused of links to the PKK and just 137 to ISIS. Turkey has
also refused to give air cover to Syrian Kurdish soldiers fighting
against the ISIS. Well aware of this, US remains reluctant to condemn
Turkey. US has never shied away from using its allies and enemies to
suit its own strategic interests, without paying attention to the
consequences of such collaborations, however harmful.
By 2014, the sectarian Sunni-Shia character of the civil
war in Syria was bemoaned in the United States as an unfortunate
development. But in December 2006, the man heading the US embassy in
Syria advocated in a cable to the Secretary of State and the White House
that the US government collaborate with Saudi Arabia and Egypt to
promote sectarian conflict in Syria between Sunni and Shia as a means of
destabilizing the Syrian government. At that time, no one in the US
government could credibly have claimed innocence of the possible
implications of such a policy. This cable was written at the height of
the sectarian Sunni-Shia civil war in Iraq, which the US military was
unsuccessfully trying to contain. US public disgust with the sectarian
civil war in Iraq unleashed by the US invasion had just cost Republicans
control of Congress in the November 2006 election. The election result
immediately precipitated the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld as secretary
of defense. No one working for the US government on foreign policy at
the time could have been unaware of the implications of promoting
Sunni-Shia sectarianism.And yet the US proceeded to do exactly that in Syria, repeating its
horrendous attack on Iraq, which reduced it to a warring, fragmented and
unstable country. Verso author Patrick Cockburn,
“The result is that the US may find it has helped to destabilize Turkey
by involving it in the war in both Iraq and Syria, yet without coming
much closer to defeating Isis in either country. If so, America will
have committed its biggest mistake in the Middle East since it invaded
Iraq in 2003.”
US foreign policy in the Middle East has generally rested
on four pillars: Turkey, Egypt, the Persian Gulf monarchies, and
Israel. That combination of strategic placement, wealth and military
power has successfully kept the region divided and powerless for more
than a half century.Interpretations by scholars in
US diplomatic cables related to Syria, read in combination with those
on Turkey, Iran and Iraq, are key to understanding US’s strategic
involvement in the ongoing war in Syria.
…to randomly pick up isolated diplomatic records that
intersect with known entities and disputes, as some daily newspapers
have done, is to miss ‘the empire’ for its cables…This book begins to
address the need for scholarly analysis of what the millions of
documents published by Wikileaks say about international geopolitics.