وثيقة وكالة استخبارات الجيش الأمريكي في 2012: الولايات المتحدة و حلفائها سيتغاضون عن صعود الدولة الإسلامية من أجل عزل النظام السوري

يوم الاثنين، 18 مايو 2015، نشرت مجموعة المراقبة التابعة لليمين الأمريكي المحافظ المعروفة بإسم “المراقبة القضائية” مجموعة من الوثائق السرية التي تم الحصول عليها من وزارة الدفاع الأمريكية ووزارة الخارجية من خلال دعوى قضائية فيدرالية.

وبينما ركزت وسائل الاعلام الأمريكية على الوثائق التي تكشف تعامل مع البيت الأبيض مع الهجوم على القنصلية الأمريكية في بنغازي عام 2011، يأتي الكشف الأكبر و الأكثر الأهمية في واحدة من وثائق وكالة استخبارات الدفاع المصدرة في عام 2012، و هو أن تأسيس “دولة إسلامية” في شرق سوريا هو شيئ مطلوب و محبذ لتنفيذ سياسات الغرب في المنطقة.

المذهل هو أن الوثيقة تقول نصاً: “الغرب ودول الخليج وتركيا يدعمون المعارضة السورية … هناك إمكانية إنشاء إمارة سلفية معلنة أو غير معلنة، في شرق سوريا (الحسكة ودير الزور)، وهذا هو بالضبط ما تريده القوى الداعمة للمعارضة، من أجل عزل النظام السوري … “.

 الوثيقة المصنفة سابقاً بتصنيف “سري// ليس للأجانب” وبتاريخ 12 أغسطس 2012، عممت على نطاق واسع بين مختلف الوكالات الأمنية الأمريكية، بما في ذلك القيادة المركزية ووكالة الإستخبارات المركزية ومكتب التحقيقات الفيدرالي، ووزارة الخارجية ووكالات أخرى.

وتظهر الوثيقة أنه في وقت مبكر من عام 2012، توقعت المخابرات الامريكية صعود الدولة الإسلامية في العراق والشام (داعش)، ولكن بدلا من ترسيم واضح للمجموعة كعدو، يصور التقرير التنظيم الإرهابي باعتباره حليف إستراتيجي محتمل للولايات المتحدة.

في حين أن عددا من المحللين والصحفيين وثقوا منذ فترة طويلة دور وكالات الاستخبارات الغربية في تشكيل وتدريب المعارضة المسلحة في سوريا، تأتي هذه الوثيقة كأعلى تأكيد إستخباراتي داخلي الولايات للنظرية القائلة بأن الحكومات الغربية كانت ترى في الأساس أن داعش من الممكن أن تكون أداة تساعدهم على تغيير النظام في سوريا.

ملخص ما جاء في نص الوثيقة هو:

• أن تنظيم القاعدة يقود المعارضة في سوريا
• الغرب متحالف مع المعارضة
• إنشاء الدولة الإسلامية الوليدة أصبح واقعا مع بداية الحرب الأهلية السورية (ليس هناك ذكر لانسحاب القوات الامريكية من العراق كعامل محفز للصعود الدولة الإسلامية)
• إنشاء “إمارة سلفية” في شرق سوريا هو “بالضبط” ما تريده القوى الخارجية الداعمة للمعارضة (التي تعرف بأنها “الغرب ودول الخليج وتركيا”) من أجل إضعاف حكومة الأسد
• “إقتراح إنشاء مناطق ملاذات آمنة” في المناطق التي غزاها المتمردين الإسلاميين على غرار النموذج الليبي 
• العراق متعاطف مع المد الشيعي
• الدولة الإسلامية” السنية” يمكن أن تكون مدمرة إلى “لوحدة العراق” ويمكن أن تؤدي إلى “تجديد دخول العناصر الإرهابية من جميع أنحاء العالم العربي  إلى ساحة النزاع في العراق.

الإطلاع على الوثيقة كاملة

الإطلاع على نسخة إنجليزية من المقال

 

 

2012 US Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will tolerate rise of Islamic State “in order to isolate the Syrian regime”

by Brad Hoff

On Monday, May 18, the conservative government watchdog group Judicial Watch published a selection of formerly classified documents obtained from the U.S. Department of Defense and State Department through a federal lawsuit.

While initial mainstream media reporting is focused on the White House’s handling of the Benghazi consulate attack, a much “bigger picture” admission and confirmation is contained in one of theDefense Intelligence Agency documents circulated in 2012: that an ‘Islamic State’ is desired in Eastern Syria to effect the West’s policies in the region.

Astoundingly, the newly declassified report states that for “THE WEST, GULF COUNTRIES, AND TURKEY [WHO] SUPPORT THE [SYRIAN] OPPOSITION… THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SUPPORTING POWERS TO THE OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE SYRIAN REGIME…”.

The DIA report, formerly classified “SECRET//NOFORN” and dated August 12, 2012, was circulated widely among various government agencies, including CENTCOM, the CIA, FBI, DHS, NGA, State Dept., and many others.

The document shows that as early as 2012, U.S. intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a U.S. strategic asset.

While a number of analysts and journalists have documented long ago the role of western intelligence agencies in the formation and training of the armed opposition in Syria, this is the highest level internal U.S. intelligence confirmation of the theory that western governments fundamentally saw ISIS as their own tool for regime change in Syria. The document states that scenario as a matter-of-fact.

The newly released DIA report makes the following summary points concerning “ISI” (in 2012 “Islamic State in Iraq,”) and the soon to emerge ISIS:

• Al-Qaeda drives the opposition in Syria
• The West identifies with the opposition
• The establishment of a nascent Islamic State became a reality only with the rise of the Syrian insurgency (there is no mention of U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq as a catalyst for Islamic State’s rise, which is the contention of innumerable politicians and pundits; see section 4.D. below)
• The establishment of a “Salafist Principality” in Eastern Syria is “exactly” what the external powers  supporting the opposition want (identified as “the West, Gulf Countries, and Turkey”) in order to weaken the Assad government
• “Safe havens” are suggested in areas conquered by Islamic insurgents along the lines of the Libyan model (which translates to so-called no-fly zones as a first act of ‘humanitarian war’; see 7.B.)
• Iraq is identified with “Shia expansion” (8.C)
• A Sunni “Islamic State” could be devastating to “unifying Iraq” and could lead to “the renewing facilitation of terrorist elements from all over the Arab world entering into Iraqi Arena.”

View the full Document in PDF

View Arabic Version of Article

---

 

The following is excerpted from the seven page DIA declassified report (bold-facing is my own):

R 050839Z AUG 12

…

THE GENERAL SITUATION:

A. INTERNALLY, EVENTS ARE TAKING A CLEAR SECTARIAN DIRECTION.

B. THE SALAFIST [sic], THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, AND AQI ARE THE MAJOR FORCES DRIVING THE INSURGENCY IN SYRIA.

C. THE WEST, GULF COUNTRIES, AND TURKEY SUPPORT THE OPPOSITION; WHILE RUSSIA, CHINA AND IRAN SUPPORT THE REGIME.

…

3. (C) Al QAEDA – IRAQ (AQI):… B. AQI SUPPORTED THE SYRIAN OPPOSITION FROM THE BEGINNING, BOTH IDEOLOGICALLY AND THROUGH THE MEDIA…

…

4.D. THERE WAS A REGRESSION OF AQI IN THE WESTERN PROVINCES OF IRAQ DURING THE YEARS OF 2009 AND 2010; HOWEVER, AFTER THE RISE OF THE INSURGENCY IN SYRIA, THE RELIGIOUS AND TRIBAL POWERS IN THE REGIONS BEGAN TO SYMPATHIZE WITH THE SECTARIAN UPRISING. THIS (SYMPATHY) APPEARED IN FRIDAY PRAYER SERMONS, WHICH CALLED FOR VOLUNTEERS TO SUPPORT THE SUNNI’S [sic] IN SYRIA.

…

7. (C) THE FUTURE ASSUMPTIONS OF THE CRISIS:

A. THE REGIME WILL SURVIVE AND HAVE CONTROL OVER SYRIAN TERRITORY.

B. DEVELOPMENT OF THE CURRENT EVENTS INTO PROXY WAR: …OPPOSITION FORCES ARE TRYING TO CONTROL THE EASTERN AREAS (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), ADJACENT TO THE WESTERN IRAQI PROVINCES (MOSUL AND ANBAR), IN ADDITION TO NEIGHBORING TURKISH BORDERS. WESTERN COUNTRIES, THE GULF STATES AND TURKEY ARE SUPPORTING THESE EFFORTS. THIS HYPOTHESIS IS MOST LIKELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DATA FROM RECENT EVENTS, WHICH WILL HELP PREPARE SAFE HAVENS UNDER INTERNATIONAL SHELTERING, SIMILAR TO WHAT TRANSPIRED IN LIBYA WHEN BENGHAZI WAS CHOSEN AS THE COMMAND CENTER OF THE TEMPORARY GOVERNMENT.

…

8.C. IF THE SITUATION UNRAVELS THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SUPPORTING POWERS TO THE OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE SYRIAN REGIME, WHICH IS CONSIDERED THE STRATEGIC DEPTH OF THE SHIA EXPANSION (IRAQ AND IRAN)

8.D.1. …ISI COULD ALSO DECLARE AN ISLAMIC STATE THROUGH ITS UNION WITH OTHER TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS IN IRAQ AND SYRIA, WHICH WILL CREATE GRAVE DANGER IN REGARDS TO UNIFYING IRAQ AND THE PROTECTION OF ITS TERRITORY.

via LEVANT REPORT

 

The Somalisation of Syria: Israel’s Clean Break Strategy

JULY 30, 2012, by ISRAEL SHAMIR,
Israel retains its ability to control the Syrian ‘Islamist’ rebels. Netanyahu is not worried about Syria’s possible disintegration. Despite the received wisdom claiming that Israelis prefer a stable and familiar Assad to the great unknown of Islamic guerrillas, the new and sensational information we received points out to the opposite, namely: Israelis prefer the Somalisation of Syria, its break-up and the elimination of its army, as this will allow them to tackle Iran unopposed.

This is implied in a secret file recently leaked by a person(s) apparently close to the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman. It contains a record of conversations between Bibi Netanyahu, Avigdor Lieberman and Russian President Vladimir Putin during the latter’s recent visit to Israel. Israelis seem to have no doubts about its authenticity. Counterpunch received the original file, and here are the highlights of this conversation (in our translation from Hebrew):

• Netanyahu asked Putin to facilitate Bashar Assad’s departure. “You can appoint his successor, and we shall not object , said the Israeli Prime Minister. “There is one condition – the successor must break with Iran».
• Putin responded: we have no candidate for Bashar’s successor. Do you?
• No, we don’t, replied Netanyahu, but we shall tell you our preference soon.

Israel Enters Syria: All eyes on Iran

FEBRUARY 07, 2013, by BEN SCHREINER

With its air strikes against targets inside Syria last week, Israel announced its formal entry into the Syrian crisis.  The Israeli targeting of Iran has thus entered the Syrian theater.

According to McClatchy, the Israeli strikes on January 30 targeted anti-aircraft missiles at a military base outside of Damascus.  The missiles, according to Israeli intelligence sources, were headed for Hezbollah in Lebanon.

“Israel relies heavily on the strength of our air force, and its strategic deterrence,” an Israeli official explained to McClatchy. “Weapons systems that make our air force vulnerable will not be allowed to fall into the hands of terrorist groups.”

Accordingly, Washington reacted to the Israeli assault by sternly warning Damascus.  “Syria,” White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes warned, “should not further destabilize the region by transferring weaponry to Hezbollah.”

Washington, in other words, views any effort to curb Israel’s freedom to fly sorties when and where it fancies as a threat to regional stability.  Of course, “stability” in the Washington lexicon is used to connote unmatched Western military superiority.  (Thus, NATO Patriot batteries deployed along the Turkey-Syria border are championed as a means to “deescalate tensions.”)

With such “stability” in mind, Time reports that Washington has given a “green light” to Israel to carry out yet further strikes.  And blessed with such carte blanche, Israel is already planning an escalated level of intervention.

Israel and U.S. Coordinating How to Target Syria

52 days after an Israeli general publicly declared that Syria has used chemical weapons against rebels, the Obama administration reached the same conclusion, and used the finding to justify announcing it would send small arms to the side of the victims. “I will not say ‘We told you so,’ only, okay, the proof is there, so there’s no more question about it,” says Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor, taking with a smile the easy part of the equation now laid before Israel. As for the hard part: “Now, what should be done? It’s not for Israel to say, because the international involvement in this should not include Israel. Israel follows very closely developments there. It’s very concerned about activity on its borders. But we’re not aspiring to be involved in any action about what’s happening in Syria.”

In fact, of course, Israel is closely involved already, and in more ways than they are acknowledged publicly. Israeli military officials tell TIME that American intelligence had the same information that Brig. Gen. Itai Brun cited in his April 23 presentation to a public conference – video footage showing victims foaming at the mouth, and other indicators that made it clear that sarin had been used on the battlefield more than once. “We are sharing,” one Israeli intelligence official said at the time. “We have our cards on the table with the Americans for a long time. They’ve had all this information.”

The Syrian Plan: Who Gains From Syrian Bloodbath?

by PATRICK COCKBURN

Syria is close to following Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya as the target of a major Western military intervention. It certainly looks that way after the American decision last week to send weapons to the rebels in a move that can only deepen the conflict.

The supposed aim of the United States arms supply is to “tip the balance” in favour of the insurgents and force Bashar al-Assad’s government to negotiate its departure from power. But Assad holds all but one of Syria’s cities and large towns, so, to transform the military situation on the ground the US, Britain and France would have to become the main fighting force of the rebels and engage in a full-scale war.

Such a war would be similar to what happened in Afghanistan in 2001 when the cutting edge of the anti-Taliban offensive was strategic and tactical American air support. The anti-Taliban militiamen led by the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara warlords of the Northern Alliance were few in number – I kept running into the same small units on the road from Kabul to Kandahar – and acted essentially as a mopping-up force that did little real fighting.

In northern Iraq in 2003 the Kurdish Peshmerga were careful not to advance anywhere until the Iraqi army facing them had been pummelled by US bombers. One Kurdish commander told me that his men could not advance an inch without US permission because “we have to co-operate with American air support”. Much the same happened in Libya in 2011 when, for all the laudatory media coverage of the rebels, they would not have survived for more than a few days without Nato Special Forces on the ground and air power overhead.

Of course, the Western intervention in Libya started off with the declared humanitarian purpose of preventing Gaddafi capturing Benghazi and massacring its people. The reality was that Nato leaders were determined to overthrow the regime. The main role of Libyan militiamen on the road south of Benghazi was to appear on foreign television. One of the more amusing sights at the time was to watch cameramen asking other members of the media to stand to one side so viewers would not see that journalists were more numerous than Libyan fighters in the front line.

How Obama and Al-Qaeda Became Syrian Bedfellows

by SHAMUS COOKE

For a president that is executing Bush’s “war on terror” against Al-Qaeda and “its affiliates,” it seems odd that President Obama has targeted the secular Syrian government for “regime change.”

Equally odd is that Obama’s strongest military ally on the ground in Syria- the best equipped and effective fighting force against the Syrian Government — is Jabhat al-Nusra, a group that has affiliated itself with  al-Qaeda, and aims to turn Syria into an extremist Islamic state that enforces a fundamentalist version of Sharia law.

It’s difficult to know exactly how al-Nursa received its guns, but one can make an educated guess. For example, The New York Times explained in detail how the CIA has been in a massive arms trafficking operation that has already funneled thousands of tons of guns from Saudi Arabia and Qatar to Syria:

“The C.I.A. role in facilitating the [weapons] shipments… gave the United States a degree of influence over the process [of weapon distribution]…American officials have confirmed that senior White House officials were regularly briefed on the [weapons] shipments.”

Where are the guns winding up in this massive arms trafficking operation? An important question to ask is: which rebels in Syria have guns and which ones don’t.  The Guardian reports:

“The [secular] Free Syrian Army’s shortage of weapons and other resources compared with [jihadist] Jabhat al-Nusra is a recurrent theme… ‘If you join al-Nusra, there is always a gun for you but many of the FSA brigades can’t even provide bullets for their fighters,’…3,000 FSA [Free Syrian Army] men have joined al-Nusra in the last few months, mainly because of a lack of weapons and ammunition…Al-Nusra fighters rarely withdraw for shortage of ammunition…”

On the Road to Damascus? The U.S. Targets Syria

originally published March 08, 2004, in:

by TOM BARRY

Getting out of the political quicksand of Iraq, or at least burying the bloody occupation as an embarrassing daily news item, is mission number one for the Bush campaign.

Extricating U.S. troops and political capital from the mess the Bush administration created in Iraq may be mission impossible. But the president’s political and ideological handlers have proved adept at spinning the administration out of scandals and misadventures. Their operating principle, which they enshrined as official national security strategy, seems to be: the best defense is a good offense.

When you are down in the polls and the “bring ‘em on” machismo no longer seems to get the patriotic rise it first did, the Bush team doesn’t retreat. It advances with more tough words backed by military muscle and missionary zeal. The Bush administration still has an itchy trigger finger, and is in search of another evildoer to confront.

Even before the U.S. occupation forces settled into Saddam Hussein’s palaces in Baghdad, the neoconservatives who have set the direction of the Bush presidency’s radical foreign and military policies were looking toward Syria. Before the month is out, it’s likely that President Bush will announce new sanctions against Syria–accusing the northern neighbor of Israel, Lebanon, and Iraq of many of the same offenses that were leveled against the Hussein regime in Iraq. The charge list includes developing biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction, condemning the U.S. occupation of Iraq, supporting international terrorism, and succoring anti-U.S. and anti-Israel guerrilla forces.

Immediately before the Iraq invasion, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security traveled to Israel and promised Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that “it will be necessary to deal with threats from Syria, Iran, and North Korea afterwards.” In April 2003 Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz warned: “There’s got to be a change in Syria.”

Israel’s Plans for Syria & Iran

originally published April 23, 2003, in:

by WILLIAM A. COOK

Even before the “victory” in Iraq had been declared, Administration officials began leveling accusations at Syria that sounded strangely familiar, something like a regurgitation of the lies that had propelled our forces into the “war that wasn’t.” Predictably, that series of accusations was followed by Sharon’s demands of the US military, that they undertake five goals desired by Israel, which are briefly; disarming Iran, Libya and Syria. These demands represent the next step in Israel’s fulfillment of the Wolfowitz/ Perle design to achieve “The New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” the report they prepared for the Israeli right wing Likud party in 1996.

Ha’aretz listed Sharon’s demands in its April 16th edition, demands uttered only two days earlier by Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz: 1. “The removal and dismantling of Palestinian terrorist organizations operating out of Damascus ­ Hamas and Islamic Jihad; 2. The ouster of Iranian Revolutionary Guards from Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley; 3. An end to Syrian cooperation with Iran, including attempts to transfer arms to the Palestinian Authority and incite Israeli Arabs; 4. The deployment of the Lebanese Army along Lebanon’s border with Israel and the ouster of Hezbollah from the area; and 5. The dismantling of the surface-to-surface missile network that Israel charges Hezbollah has built in Southern Lebanon.” Sharon added that President Pashar Assad “is dangerous. His judgment is impaired.” Like Saddam, Israel and America are confronted once again with a dangerous threat in the form of a dictator.