Whither the Syrian “revolutionaries” ?

By Thierry Meysson (Voltaire Net)

On the eve of the Geneva 2 Conference, the American organisers no longer have any puppets to play the role of Syrian revolutionaries. The sudden disappearance of the Free Syrian Army shows those who believed in it that it was a fiction. There has never been a popular revolution in Syria; just foreign aggression staged by mercenaries and billions of dollars.

November 29, 2011, a delegation from the Free Syrian Army allied itself with a delegation from the Syrian National Council. In theory, the opposition now had a military wing and a political wing. In reality, the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Council are two fictions created by NATO. Both are exclusively composed of mercenaries and have little reality of their own in the field.

The organizers of the Geneva peace conference urgently seek a representative for the armed Syrian opposition. According to Westerners, the conflict opposes an abominable dictatorship to its own people. However, armed groups that destroy Syria – from the Islamic Front to Al-Qaeda – officially call for foreign fighters, even if the former claims to be composed primarily of Syrians. Inviting them would amount to admitting that there has never been a revolution in Syria, only foreign aggression.

Indeed, the Free Syrian Army, which a few weeks ago we were told included 40,000 men, has disappeared. After its headquarters was attacked by mercenaries and arsenals were looted, its historic leader, General Salim Idriss, fled through Turkey and found refuge in Qatar.

At the time of its formation, July 29, 2011, the FSA had set a single objective: the overthrow of President Bashar al -Assad. The FSA has never specified whether it fought for a secular regime or an Islamic regime. It never adopted any political position with regards to Justice, Education, Culture, Economics, Labour, Environment, etc. . It never ​​ drafted the slightest policy program.

It was, we were told, formed of soldiers from the Syrian Arab Army who had defected. There were indeed defections during the second half of 2011, but their total number never exceeded 4 %, which is negligible on a country-wide scale.

No : The FSA did not need a political program because it had a flag, that of French colonisation. In force during the French mandate over Syria and maintained during the first years of supposed independence, it symbolized the Sykes-Picot Agreement: Syria was largely amputated and divided into ethnic and confessional states. Three stars symbolized a Druze state, an Alawite State and a Christian state. All Syrians know this fatal flag, be it only by its presence in the office of the Syrian collaborator of the French occupation in a famous soap opera.

Its first leader, Colonel Riad al-Assad, has disappeared to the dustbin of history. He was selected for his name, which is written differently in Arabic but is pronounced identically in European languages ​​with that of President Bashar al-Assad. The only difference between the two men, from a point of view of the Gulf monarchies, was that the first was Sunni and the second, Alawite.

In reality, the Free Syrian Army is a Franco-British creation as were the “Benghazi revolutionaries” in Libya (who had “chosen” the flag of King Idris I, collaborator of the English occupants).

An armed tool of NATO, intended to take the presidential palace when the Atlantic Alliance had bombed the country, the FSA has been tossed by successive plans and the successive failures of the West and the Gulf Cooperation Council. Presented a second time as the armed wing of a political council in exile, the former did not recognize the latter’s authority and obeyed only its Franco-British employers. It was in effect the armed wing of their secret services of which the Syrian National Coalition was the political front. Ultimately, the FSA could accumulate success only with the direct assistance of NATO, namely the Turkish Army that housed it in its own bases.

Created in the framework of a 4th generation war, the FSA has failed to adapt to the Second Syrian War, the Nicaraguan type. The first war (from the NATO meeting in Cairo in February, 2011 to the Geneva Conference in June, 2012) was a media staging to delegitimize power so that it would fall like a ripe fruit into the hands of NATO. Military actions were perpetrated by different factions, receiving their orders directly from the Alliance. It seved above all to give credence to media lies giving the illusion of a widespread revolt. According to the theories of William Lind and Martin Van Creveld, the FSA was a label to refer to all these groups, but which did not have its own hierarchical structure. Instead, the Second War (from the meeting of the “Friends of Syria” in Paris in July, 2012 to the Geneva 2 Conference in January, 2014) is a war of attrition to “bleed” the country until its surrender. To fulfill its role, the FSA would have had to turn into a real army, with a hierarchy and discipline, which it has never been able to do.

Feeling its end was near, since the Turkish- Iranian rapprochement, the FSA had announced its possible participation in Geneva 2 by demanding unrealistic conditions. But it was already too late. Mercenaries paid by Saudi Arabia set this NATO fiction straight. Everyone can now see the naked truth: there has never been a revolution in Syria.

Translation: Roger Lagassé

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.