The American War against the Syrian state without prospects
14 January, 2013 – By Ghaleb Kandil – Voltaire.org

From what has came out from the tripartite meeting in Geneva between the Russians, the Americans and the international envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, Friday, January 11, it is clear that the refusal of the United States to recognize the failure of the universal war that they launched against Syria and its president Bashar al-Assad, is a major obstacle that prevents a political solution to the Syrian crisis.

It is Washington that has sabotaged all initiatives by refusing to engage through the Security Council to stop arming and financing armed groups in Syria. This is due to the fact that it is the U.S. who managed the war in Syria, set up operating rooms in Turkey, whose members are CIA agents responsible for coordinating international and regional efforts to mobilize terrorists around the world to send in Syria. U.S. officials publicly boast of providing modern communication equipment to armed gangs, and they expressed no regret, even after acknowledging that much of this equipment has fallen into the hands of al-Qaida fighters of al-Nosra Front, an organization they late put on their terrorist list, on which they could include other groups shortly, why they do not change their position on commitments to stop the violence.

As clear commitments to stop military and financial support to terrorist groups are not officially taken in the Geneva meetings, it means that the U.S. administration is determined to continue the war of attrition against the state Syria in the coming months. The United States, who are unable to bear the human and material losses in a direct confrontation, know that the Syrian national state, which has shown a remarkable strength throughout the war, will be even more determined to preserve its political independence after the end of fighting. It is for this reason that Washington binds the establishment of mechanisms for stopping the war to the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, who is a popular leader, tough, with patriotic choices. If he is to be ousted in the current circumstances, it will open the way to new balances which may put the Syrian army and people away from a truly independent Syria. The axis of the resistance will be, then, seriously weakened.

Lakhdar Brahimi’s comments are below the level of debate, because the international envoy has long been the spokesman for the United States and the West. On the other hand, the strong position of Russia, supported by the Brics countries, especially China and Iran, is motivated by the reality that Syria is the first line of defense for all independent forces that oppose unilateral U.S. hegemony. Assad is the symbol of this reality. Asking for his resignation is like demanding the departure of Fidel Castro in Cuba of the sixties. …more

The Power of Moral Sanction
By Jay Taber – April 2002

The power of moral sanction, as a penalty of conscience for violations of our sense of decency, based on a belief in the application of justice, has been essential to struggles for autonomy and dignity since the Middle Ages, and is, in my opinion, central to the struggle of rebuilding democratic society today. An examination, therefore, of the strengths and weaknesses of this tool of social change is warranted. This paper is my attempt to articulate the related aspects of leadership as demonstrated by the historical figures focused on in our readings and discussion. I begin with some general thoughts and impressions from our seminars, and proceed to particulars revolving around some of the figures examined.

Moral sanction, alone, may be insufficient to constrain political violence or official repression, but it can bring significant pressures to bear on public behavior as well as within institutions under the control or influence of civil society. Indeed, both reform and revolutionary movements, as well as all forms of resistance in fundamental conflict with tyrannical powers, rely on moral sanction as an essential component of warfare.

Resistance warfare may take different and multiple forms: war of position, based on a principle (i.e. boycotts); war of movement, uniting affinity interest groups (i.e. strikes); civil disobedience, to garner attention to an issue or recognition of the aggrieved; underground warfare, to subvert illegitimate authorities (i.e. sabotage); or open conflict, to challenge the police powers of these authorities (including riots and armed insurrection), but the degree of commitment by the oppressed participants, and the

approbation of non-combatants and potential recruits, is largely determined by the ability of resistance leaders to articulate and disseminate the moral values at issue.

In this way, resistors gain not only attention, but also recognition of the validity of their grievances. At the same time, the moral prestige of the oppressive or repressive State is diminished, and opportunities to obtain concessions or to leverage discussion and dialogue are enhanced. The danger encountered at this fulcrum point is in allowing mediation of communication to divert attention from the revolutionary movement toward an often fraudulent negotiating process. Bad faith offers of conflict settlement by official parties are usually welcomed with open arms by observers and less committed allies. The psychological warfare, the war of ideas, and the war of maneuver are constant; those committed to and capable of seizing power must, thus, continue intelligence and self-defense activities in anticipation of future attack.

The strongest movements will, I believe, combine all forms of warfare, emphasizing the appropriate form at the appropriate time. Highly-principled charismatic leaders, such as Gandhi may, unfortunately, become dismayed by movement shortcomings, but this is the unavoidable paradox of leadership: visionaries are essential to inspiring altruistic action, yet the visions are always betrayed; the quest for justice is what motivates the multitudes, but a better deal that can be built on is sometimes all that can be gained.

Chief Joseph came to understand these aspects of the march of human folly, accepting his responsibility toward the survival of his people in order to hope for better times. A much younger and less socially burdened Joan of Arc did not. …more

The moral and organizational strength of the EZLN
16 Decemebr, 2012 – By Jaime Martínez Veloz – Intercontinental Cry

Next 1st of January will mark the first 18 years of the armed uprising of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN). A country that was on the threshold of modernity was surprised that thousands of insurgents, mostly indigenous, had taken up arms as a last resort, to fight for a better life for indigenous peoples and for the country.

The mobilization of thousands of Mexicans forced the state to negotiate with the insurgents for a decent and fair solution. After more than two years of intense negotiations, they managed to come to the first agreement between the federal government and the EZLN on indigenous rights and culture, which was signed on February 16, 1996, in the municipality of San Andres Larrainzar in Chiapas.

When an attempt was made for the agreement to be transferred to the Mexican legislative system through a bill drafted by the Commission for Agreement and Pacification (Cocopa), the state’s reaction was brutal, cynical and stark. The initiative contained the most important items agreed between the federal government and the EZLN, there was not one idea in it that had not been agreed by the parties.

The EZLN’s reaction to the initiative developed by Cocopa was one of acceptance, and that of the authorities was scandal and hypocrisy. The President and the economic power groups in the country had no qualms about accusing the EZLN and the Cocopa of wanting to balkanize, divide and fragment the country. Those who made these accusations are the same people who gave concessions of 25 million hectares to foreign and domestic mining companies, who between 2005 and 2010 extracted mineral resources worth 552 billion pesos and only paid 6,500 million pesos for the rights, that is to say 1.18 per cent. …more

Idle No More: What do we want and where are we headed?
14 January, 2013 – by Pamela D. Palmater – Americas Program

The Idle No More movement is part of a larger Indigenous movement that has been in the making for several years now. Indigenous activists all over the country have been monitoring the political and legal scene in Canada at both the federal and provincial levels and making a concerted effort to help inform First Nation community members and leaders about any potential threats. We noted a clear assimilation agenda that emerged within the Conservative government and we started planning on how we could address that if Prime Minister Harper insisted on putting his plan into action.

We of course worked very hard to try all the usual channels to address our growing concerns, which included lobbying, letter-writing, testifying before Senate and Parliament, endless meetings with MPs, Senators, Ministers and others — all to no avail. The Harper government was not interested in talking to us, let alone consulting or getting our consent. Harper decided instead to use the Assembly of First Nations as his primary vehicle to call all the shots. Harper’s government set the agenda, they drafted the joint action plans and they alone decided what was and was not on the table. In other words, Harper managed to bully his assimilation plan onto the First Nation agenda with hardly a squeak of opposition at the political level.

At the so-called Crown-First Nation Gathering (CFNG) last January 2012, Harper promised First Nations his government would not unilaterally amend or repeal the Indian Act. After the CFNG, he broke that promise and proceeded with an aggressive legislative agenda that will include upwards of 14 bills that will devastate our First Nations in various ways. It is the White Paper 2012 with a twist — instead of it being a policy, like the 1969 White Paper, which wanted to assimilate Indians, Harper’s plan will be law. This is the spark that ignited the Idle No More movement into action.

We always knew action would be required at some point, but the legislation posed an imminent threat and required immediate mobilization. That is how a movement was born. In the early days, some were calling the Idle No More movement, some calling it an Indigenous rights movements, but we all agreed that we needed to immediately oppose Harper’s assimilatory legislative agenda. So many of the early activities included teach-ins which helped explain the legislation’s potential impacts on First Nations and more importantly, what we could do to oppose it. …more

Al-Nusra Front in Levant… Made in KSA
Local Editor – 15January, 2013 – Moqawama.org

A specialized report in strategic affairs issued in Paris revealed that the Saudi General Intelligence is the founder and establisher of “al-Nusra Front in Levant” that plots to establish an “Emirate in Syria.”

Al-Nusra Front, Saudi-Made with Lebanese Assistance

In detail, an “Intelligence Online” report, which receives information from foreign intelligence sources, mentioned, “The Saudi General Intelligence, controlled by Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz, exploited its broad calls with Takfiri [atoning] movements in Iraq to help establish al-Nusra Front, a low-profile Takfiri movement.”

The report added, “Thanks to funding from the General Intelligence Department and support from the Saudi Intelligence in Lebanon, al-Nusra was able to swiftly arm its forces, and make the Syrian regime suffer painful blows through its expertise in Iraqi bombings.”

Strikes of this sort included dominating Sheikh Suleiman Base in Aleppo and invading Yarmouk Palestinian Refugee Camp on the 16th of December 2012.

However, many websites had recently published what seemed to be leaked confidential documents issued from the KSA’s Interior, which spoke of “a Saudi military official supplying armed groups in Syria with money and weaponry.”

Another leaked document mentioned “an amnesty to hundreds of criminals sentenced to death on charges of drug-trafficking, murder, and rape, was issued to send them to fight in Syria among the militias of the [so-called] Free Syrian Army.”

Moreover, the US administration had recently listed “al-Nusra Front” as a terrorist organization for being linked to al-Qaeda, after performing hundreds of bombings and attacks in Syria.

Al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State

On a parallel note, “al-Nusra Front” had revealed that it seeks to establish a so-called “Islamic” State in Syria, stressed by its chief Abu Mohammad al-Joulani on the Qatari Jazeera Channel, when addressing his followers, “The regime’s collapse in Syria will create a vacuum that you are qualified to fill.”

He further accentuated that he is heading towards “establishing an Emirate and Shura Council in Syria.”

Furthermore, Le Nouvel Observateur French weekly cited an “al-Nusra” spiritual leader Abu Mohammad al-Atawi as saying, “Victory will not cease in Syria,” foreseeing that “triumph is months away.”

Al-Atawi, who taught for a long time in KSA before returning to Jordan, saw that “The Arab Spring will help Salafists invade the world, starting with Tunisia, then Egypt, Libya, all the way to Syria, and soon in Jordan,” revealing that the Front “includes 8,000 men and is increasing.”

Al-Nusra Front and Militia Dominance in Syria

In a similar context, the Salafist Takfiri leader in Jordan Mohammad al-Shalabi, aka “Abu Sayyaf”, in an interview with the weekly, emphasized his participation in founding “al-Nusra Front” after leaving jail last year on charges of plotting attacks on Jordanian Army bases there.

He further highlighted that he is currently gathering fighters all over Jordan to send them to Syria.

Abu Sayyaf underscored, “The Front’s ideology is the same of that of al-Qaeda,” indicating that his organization “that moved its battle from Iraq to Syria is about to dominate other fighting groups.” ….source

Report-Bahrain: Imports Repressive Arms from Korea
12 January, 2013 – Bahrian Youth Society for Human Rights

The Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights (BYSHR) has monitored during the past year 2012 the intense use of tear-gas and stun grenades against protestors in Bahrain, and according to the documentation of the BYSHR and international organizations, the use of tear-gas led to the death of at least 20 people, where the security forces used it as a killing device:

1. Security forces deliberately throw tear-gas canisters inside or near houses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5JNiptMvlM&playnext=1&list=PL7591E873E817621F&feature=results_main

2. Security forces deliberately throw teargas canisters inside or near cars.

3. Security forces deliberately throw teargas canisters inside cramped areas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MgJccgvAMM

Prohibiting repressive arms:

The BYSHR monitored statements of officials from “the U.S, U.K, Belgium and France” that they stopped selling arms that are used for suppressing protests in Bahrain since 2011 due the human rights violations and its misuse by the riot police.

Buying repressive arms:

Since the Bahraini Authorities started using various and new kinds of teargas and stun grenades; the source of those repressive arms could not be found due to the following reasons:

1. Lack of information on the teargas canisters or stun grenades (manufacturing country, expiry date, methods of use);

2. The Bahraini Authorities does not allow public opinion to access information that is considered military;
However, a group of activists and the BYSHR were able to obtain information related to the (manufacturing country, and the side effects) as well as the method of using stun grenades and teargas.

The (DAEKWANG) Korean Company is considered the lead supplier of teargas and stun grenades since approximately a year and a half ago “after the February 2011 protests”. The company exports its products to the most suppressive countries – according to the website – such as Syria and Saudi Arabia. ( Company website: www.teargas.kr) …more

Bahrain : Human Rights Defender Zainab Al-Khawaja Yet Again Faces the Judge for One of 13 Trumped-Up Charges Against Her
15 January, 2013 – Bahrain Center for Human Rights

Activist and human rights defender Zainab Al-Khawaja will go to court again on 15th January 2013 to be sentenced for a trumped-up charge of allegedly insulting a police officer.

Al-Khawaja was recently released from prison on the 27th of December 2012 after being arrested on the 9th of December 2012 for staging a one-person protest outside the intensive care unit at Salmaniya hospital, demanding visitation rights for an injured citizen. The security forces prevented the patient’s family from visiting him at the hospital.

Zainab Al-Khawaja currently has thirteen cases against her, 7 of them are active at the court, including the case of ripping a picture of the king. She has already been sentenced to imprisonment in several cases, and received hundreds of dinars in fines.

“Insulting a police officer” is a similar charge which was used against Activist Masooma Al-Sayed, which is believed to be aimed to prolong her detention. Masooma was scheduled to be released from prison on the 7th January, 2013, pending trial and paying a fine of 100 BHD, but the prison authorities refused to release her for unknown reasons. Al-Sayed was finally released on the 14th of January 2013. The judge who is prosecuting Al-Sayed is the same judge prosecuting Al-Khawaja.

(More information HERE)

The BCHR believes that the continued judicial harassment of Zainab Al-Khawaja is directly linked to both her work in the defense of human rights and democracy in Bahrain and for exercising her right to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. …more

Journalist Nazeeha Saeed calls on UN Special Rapporteurs to investigate Bahraini authorities’ failure to hold accountable those who tortured her
Foreign Note, 10 January, 2013

Bahraini journalist Nazeeha Saeed today filed a letter of allegation to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, asking them to urgently investigate her mistreatment and the failure of the Bahraini government to conduct an impartial investigation into her abuse and hold accountable those police officers responsible for it. The letter was filed with the assistance of the Media Legal Defence Initiative (MLDI) and international law firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.

Having reported on pro-democracy demonstrations held at Bahrain’s Pearl Roundabout in the spring of 2011, Ms Saeed was called into a Bahraini police station for questioning. There, she was blindfolded, kicked, punched, and slapped. Her hair was pulled, she was whipped with plastic tubing, had a shoe forced into her mouth and her head dunked into a toilet. An unknown, caustic liquid said to be urine was poured onto her face, she was repeatedly insulted and mentally abused and asked to make a false confession. Three independent medical reports, two of which were from Bahraini government doctors, corroborate Ms Saeed’s account of the torture she suffered while in custody.

While it initially seemed that the Bahraini authorities were investigating Ms Saeed’s complaint about her mistreatment by the police in earnest, the actual steps undertaken to bring those who assaulted here were grossly insufficient. While Ms Saeed was able to identify 5 of her attackers, only one female police officer, Sara al-Moosa, was prosecuted. The trial was repeatedly delayed and resulted in the acquittal of the policewoman in October 2012. The Court’s reasoning for the acquittal, including that the medical reports allegedly do not support Ms Nazeeha’s claims of torture, has no factual basis in the evidence.

An appeal was formally launched, but the Prosecution has made no effort to convince the Court that the court of first instance had erred in its acquittal of Ms al-Moosa. The case is now scheduled for judgment in February, but Ms Saeed holds little hope for a fair outcome. She therefore has turned to the UN Special Rapporteurs in the hope that they might help persuade the Bahraini authorities to handle her case justly and fairly.

The appeal to the Special Rapporteurs calls on Mr Frank La Rue and Ms Gabriela Knaul to:

– urgently investigate and raise with the government of Bahrain the mistreatment of Ms Saeed;

– investigate and raise with the government of Bahrain its failure to conduct an impartial investigation into Ms Saeed’s abuse;

– investigate and raise with the government of Bahrain its failure to hold accountable those police officers responsible for Ms Saeed’s abuse.

“The manner in which the Bahraini authorities have handled Ms Saeed’s case so far falls short by any standard,” said Nani Jansen, MLDI’s Senior Legal Counsel. “The failure to hold those responsible for her abuse to account contributes to the culture of impunity in the country. It is therefore not only important that Ms. Nazeeha’s individual case be properly investigated and prosecuted, but also that a strong signal is sent that the abuse of journalists in general will not be condoned.”

Saudi Arabia Faces New Challenge From Its Restive Youth
By: Barbara Slavin – AlMonitor – 7 January

On Twitter, the social media site now used by about 400,000 Saudis, anonymous government tweeters are derided as “egg people” because they don’t post their pictures and are thus depicted only by white ovals.

A new book by a veteran American journalist Caryle Murphy predicts that Saudi Arabia faces an “increasingly bumpy” two decades as its youth — who make up more than 60% of the population — demand jobs, economic justice and greater individual freedom.

This detail is among many fascinating nuggets in a new book — A Kingdom’s Future: Saudi Arabia Through the Eyes of its Twenty somethings — in which veteran journalist Caryle Murphy presents a nuanced portrait of Saudi youth and explains the challenge they pose to the government and society of a pivotal economic and regional power.

Like the eye of a hurricane, Saudi Arabia has been relatively peaceful over the past two years while popular uprisings have swirled around it. Only in the restive Shiite east of the country have there been significant protests, which the government has handily suppressed. Still, the kingdom is facing what Murphy describes as an “increasingly bumpy” two decades as it contends with demands for jobs, homes and other material benefits and greater personal freedom from its youth, who comprise 64% of the country’s 19 million citizens.

Murphy’s account, drawn from interviews conducted while she worked as a reporter in the kingdom from 2008 to 2011 as well as encounters with Saudi students abroad, is less gloomy than another recent book on Saudi Arabia that depicts a country seething with tension and anger. Murphy does not foresee an end to the monarchy or rejection of the country’s conservative Islamic faith and traditions. But she does predict more pressure for acceptance of individuality, growing rejection of official interpretations of Islam and increasing demands for economic justice.

“Young people are worried about unemployment and being able to find an affordable home for their family,” Murphy writes. “They are angered by the perceived favoritism in government services, and the need for a wasta, or contacts, to get many things done […] Above all, they express a deep desire for greater freedom and space in their personal lives, whether it be how they dress, what major they choose at university or classes they take in high school.”

The pressure for change is due in part to modern technology as well as the dispatch of more than 140,000 students abroad. Saudi youth are more connected to each other and to global trends than ever before.

Internet users have grown from about 200,000 12 years ago to an astonishing 14.7 million — more than half the country’s residents. Among young people aged 18 to 24 in 12 Arab countries, Internet use was the highest — 91% — in Saudi Arabia, Murphy writes. Saudi Arabia is also first in the survey in terms of Twitter users.

Thus when Saudis protest, they often turn to social media. A Saudi woman confronted by religious police and ordered to leave a Riyadh shopping mall because she was wearing lipstick and nail polish filmed the encounter and posted it on YouTube on May 23, 2012. It was viewed nearly two million times in only a few weeks, Murphy writes.

Manal Al Sharif led a 2011 campaign against the ban on female driving by filming herself driving and posting the video, which soon went viral. In 2012, Hamza Kashgari, a 23-year-old blogger and writer, created an uproar by posting an imaginary conversation with the Prophet Muhammad on Twitter in which Kashgari said he would treat the Prophet as a mere human being.
…more

Al-Qaeda chief’s brother arrest in Syria, Proves the nexus of US and Al Qaeda
7 January, 2013 – Jafria News

Al Qaeda Leader’s Brother Muhammad Al ZawahiJNN 07 Jan 2012 Damascus : The Arrest of Muhammad Al Zawahiri The brother of al-Qaeda’s head Ayman al-Zawahiri by Syrian military forces in the city of Dara’a, southwest of the capital Damascus, clearly proves that the US and Saudi Governments which on record are sponsoring Insurgency in Syria , are not only Destabilizing the region , but are also the sponsors and Creators of Al Qaeda, and Promoting Terrorism world wide through Their Proxies Like Al Qaida and Taliban.

The 59-year-old Mohamed al-Zawahiri was arrested while he was meeting opposition militants in Dara’a, the English newspaper The Independent reported on Friday.

According to the daily, Western intelligence agencies fear the arrest could lead to the detention of more al-Qaeda members in Syria.

Zawahiri spent 14 years in prison in Egypt on charges of being involved in the assassination of former president Anwar Sadat in 1981 and taking part in terrorist acts.

Ayman, 61, became the head of al-Qaeda in 2011. In May 2011, US Navy SEALs claimed they killed former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Pakistan.

Ayman has called for military action against the Syrian government.

Reports say hundreds of al-Qaeda terrorists are active in Syria under the banner of the al-Nusra Front group.

Last month, the US State Department designated the al-Nusra Front group as a terror organization linked to al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia are reportedly arming and funding militants fighting the Damascus government to implement Western plans in the Arab county.

Syria has been experiencing unrest since mid-March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of security personnel, have been killed in the violence.

The Syrian government says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants fighting the Syrian government are foreign nationals.

Several international human rights organizations have accused the foreign-sponsored militants of committing war crimes. …source

Western puppet Bahraini forces attack mourners
14 January, 2013 – Islamic Invitation Turkey

Saudi-backed Bahraini forces have clashed with anti-government protesters at the funeral of a demonstrator, killed by regime forces near Manama.

The clashes broke out on Sunday after Bahraini security forces fired tear gas and birdshot to disperse peaceful protesters, who had attended the funeral of Haj Habib Ibrahim Abdullah.

Abdullah died earlier in the day after inhaling poisonous teargas, fired at a peaceful anti-regime protest in the Malkiya village. The protester’s nine-year-old grandson was also injured in the incident.

The protesters called for the release of all jailed activists and demanded that King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa step down.

Since mid-February 2011, thousands of pro-democracy protesters have staged numerous demonstrations in the streets of Bahrain, calling for the Al Khalifa royal family to relinquish power.

On March 14, 2011, troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates invaded the country to assist the Bahraini government in its crackdown on the peaceful protesters.

According to local sources, scores of people have been killed and hundreds arrested.

Physicians for Human Rights says doctors and nurses have been detained, tortured, or disappeared because they have “evidence of atrocities committed by the authorities, security forces, and riot police” in the crackdown on anti-government protesters. …source

The ultimate goal in Syria, this pundit argues, is not regime change per se, but to do whatever it takes that will result in Iran’s isolation in the region. Believing that they have succeeded in neutralizing Tehran’s allies in the Levant: Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas, the opponents of Iran will be concentrating now on subduing her supporters in Iraq. Revealing the endgame behind the plans for Syria, an Israeli intelligence report has signaled that Iran can now be attacked without coordinating a regional response. Meanwhile, there is a clock ticking in Washington which may be chiming a different tune.

The Endgame in Syria: Strategic Stage in the Pentagon’s Covert War on Iran
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya – Voltaire Network – 10 January, 2013

Since the kindling of the conflict inside Syria in 2011, it was recognized, by friend and foe alike, that the events in that country were tied to a game plan that ultimately targets Iran, Syria’s number one ally. [1] De-linking Syria from Iran and unhinging the Resistance Bloc that Damascus and Tehran have formed has been one of the objectives of the foreign-supported anti-government militias inside Syria. Such a schism between Damascus and Tehran would change the Middle East’s strategic balance in favour of the US and Israel.

If not accomplishable, however, then crippling Syria to effectively prevent it from providing Iran any form of diplomatic, political, economic, and military support in the face of common threats has been a primary objective. Preventing any continued cooperation between the two republics has been a strategic goal. This includes preventing the Iran-Iraq-Syria energy terminal from being built and ending the military pact between the two partners.
All Options are Aimed at Neutralizing Syria

Regime change in Damascus is not the only or main way for the US and its allies to prevent Syria from standing with Iran. Destabilizing Syria and neutralizing it as a failed and divided state is the key. Sectarian fighting is not a haphazard outcome of the instability in Syria, but an assisted project that the US and its allies have steadily fomented with a clear intent to balkanize the Syrian Arab Republic. Regionally, Israel above all other states has a major stake in securing this outcome. The Israelis actually have several publicly available documents, including the Yinon Plan, which outline that the destruction of Syria into a series of smaller sectarian states is one of their strategic objectives. So do American military planners.

Like Iraq next door, Syria does not need to be formally divided. For all intents and purposes, the country can be divided like Lebanon was alongside various fiefdoms and stretches of territory controlled by different groups during the Lebanese Civil War. The goal is to disqualify Syria as an external player.

Since 2006 and the Israeli defeat in Lebanon in that year there was renewed focus on the strategic alliance between Iran and Syria. Both countries have been very resilient in the face of US designs in their region. Together both have been key players for influencing events in the Middle East, from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. Their strategic alliance has undoubtedly played an important role in shaping the geo-political landscape in the Middle East. Although critics of Damascus say it has done very little in regard to substantial action against the Israelis, the Syrians have been the partners within this alliance that have carried the greatest weight in regards to facing Israel; it has been through Syria that Hezbollah and the Palestinians have been provided havens, logistics, and their initial strategic depth against Israel. …more