Changed “Terror War” strategies?

Profitable armaments industries assure that wars generated by the great powers proliferate one after another and are preferred to diplomacy and justice in resolving conflicts. The current ‘Terror War’ has seen the US-UK led alliance actively generating enemies using false flag incidents to convince sufficient numbers of people that the world is under increasing attack by radically violent terrorists. The current wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have been manufactured in this way and the numbers of women and children killed in the bombings are evidence enough that many civilians are being slaughtered rather than “terrorists” as claimed by the perpetrators.

Günter Meyer as Director of the Center for Research into the Arabic World at the University of Mainz revealed that “The most important source of ISIS financing to date has been support coming out of (US-UK allies) the Gulf states, primarily Saudi Arabia but also Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates,” []

Al Manar (Hizbollah party sponsored Arab Media) is no stranger to Israeli-American plots and ploys. Hizbollah has been fighting alongside the Syrian Army against the American, Israeli, Saudi, Qatari, Turkish (and others) war on Syria so Al Manar has a history or writing editorials that say it “as it is”. During the 2006 war between Lebanon and Israel the only media source giving accurate information was Al Manar. The following exposition is from Ahmad Shiito’s “ANTI TERROR COALITION…A Change in Strategies?” written for Al Manar on 30 August 2014, and it is translated by Ghassan Kadi and Intibah Wakeup. []:

Even though Washington benefitted from organisations such as ISIS and, just as it has used the terror of Al Qaida to serve its interests and justify its interventions in at least some parts of the region [Middle East] it may however, be concerned that the organisation that was sponsored by its intelligence game may outgrow America’s ability to control it and threaten American interests. Deciding to go to war against this organisation may also serve as a way out and a justification for a change in strategies after the failure of many current American and Western strategies.

Anti-Terror Grouping and Grabbing Opportunities: The fear of ISIS expanding and trying to find a resolution to some regional issues has pushed American diplomacy into action in Iraq. A few days ago Obama sent Kerry to the region to explore ways of forming an “anti-terror coalition”. As a result, several regional players seized on an opportunity that heralded the hallmarks of a change of policies towards Syria.

The Iranians took advantage by initiating a move towards Saudi Arabia. It seems that the outcome has been positive.

Abdel al Lahyan, the Assistant Iranian Foreign Minister, has visited Saudi Arabia and from there he went on to Syria according to some media sources. Furthermore, the Iranian Ambassador to the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation , Hamdi Rida Dakhani, has said that the recent Iranian-Saudi meeting in Jeddah has by far exceeded any expectations and may result in big changes in the region.

A few days prior, Damascus was stating that it does not object to [foreign] targeting of ISIS on its soil as long as it is done with prior co-ordination with the Syrian government. The Foreign Minister in the Syrian caretaker government, Walid Moullem, stated that Damascus is ready to co-operate with any foreign entity, including the United States, to fight terror. However, he emphasised, that any such military strike in his country cannot happen without prior co-ordination with Syrian authorities in fear of plots and hidden agendas.

What’s Next?: An anti-ISIS American strategy that extends from Iraq to Syria and even Lebanon and the talk about a future coalition against terror may signal new political directions that may in fact serve the resistance axis within a myriad of complex settlements. This has come after the Americans have realised that a desire for regime change in Syria has become a thing of the past. This has also coincided with positive developments between the West and Iran regarding its nuclear program issues.

This new strategy is said to include American raids in Iraq [on ISIS] and talks about possible similar strikes in Syria. Furthermore, some American officials have said that America has begun to supply the Lebanese Army with anti-tank and assault weapons and mortars to the value of 20 million dollars in order to raise the capacity of the Lebanese Army.

Cover-up of Failure: After Obama sent his Foreign Secretary to the Middle East to establish an anti-ISIS coalition, some top internal American security officials stated that America does not have to choose between President Assad and ISIS. Such statements were seen as a cover-up for the beginning of a change in American foreign policy towards Syria.

This cover-up was also backed up in France. The French President Hollande, has stated that “we need a huge alliance but, we have to be clear that President Assad can not be a partner in the war against terrorism”. However, such statements made for the media are one thing and facts on the ground are something else.

American policy has clearly entered a new phase in the region and some regional States will either have to go along with this new policy or live in fear of the expansion of terrorism onto its own territory.

The Saudi Press Takes Aim after the King has Spoken: Saudi and Gulf media are discussing to a great extent the danger of terrorism. The Saudi king has today reiterated what he said a few days ago to this effect. In the Saudi media, it stresses what it refers to as a “coalition against terror” as any keen observer would notice.

In this context, the Saudi newspaper Al Medina, wrote under the title of “Anti-Terror Coalition” that the Middle East now faces many threats coming from armed terror, exemplified by ISIS, regardless of what other names it comes under. It added that this is a criminal, terrorist organisation and that there is a unanimous consensus by all parties involved about its danger and the fact that it is a front for killing and violence in the name of Islam and that its strategy is based on spreading fear and panic as a tactic to facilitate its expansion whether in Syria, in Iraq or any place after that.

Under the title of “International Anti-Terror Coalition”, the Saudi paper “Alyom” wrote that the United States is not the only country that has suffered from terrorism and that many other countries, including Saudi Arabia, the UK and other countries in the Middle East have suffered the same. Therefore the danger of terrorism is not targeted against any specific State. This is perhaps why Washington was pushed to form an international coalition against terrorism. This is a call for rationality that bolsters international efforts that are facing the dangers of this onslaught on humanity as a whole. International co-operation against terror seems to have changed into an urgent agenda item in light of the recent dangerous and unprecedented developments. The international community has to curb the expansion of the octopus and is asked to take effective military measures to confront it, contain it and stop it from its expansion. There is little doubt that the American initiative appears genuine in its intentions within this very dangerous environment in order to put an end to the criminal actions and the expansion of extremists who are threatening the entire human race.

Ahmad Shiito’s Al Manar editorial above is a hopeful indication that sanity may be breaking out amongst the war-mongers.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s proposals for a “World Against Violence and Extremism” (WAVE) Act, called on all nations across the globe to denounce violence and extremism. Under the resolution, the General Assembly would urge all member states to unite against violent extremism in all its forms and manifestations, as well as sectarian violence. It would encourage efforts by leaders to discuss within their communities the causes of violent extremism and discrimination, and evolve strategies to address them. It would also recommend the promotion of community engagement in countering violent extremism, including by strengthening ties between communities and emphasizing common bonds and interests.

Ratification of the World Against Violence and Extremism Act by the great powers that sit at the Security Council would signal a return to international law and order and some justice for those survivors whose nations, communities and lives that have been subjected to unmitigated hell by the Terror War.


2 thoughts on “Changed “Terror War” strategies?

  1. “Having failed in its aim to use Isis and other groups to defeat Assad, Washington is now manipulating public sentiment to justify a resurgence of US military intervention across the region, including possible direct intervention in Syria, which it has wanted for some time to topple Assad. Now it is warning of direct military intervention within Syria itself under the pretext of destroying Isis, the monster it created. The US’s top general, Martin Dempsey, has noted that Isis could not be defeated without attacking their base in Syria.
    “Will US air strikes be used to bomb a path to Damascus for (trained and bussed-in from Libya and elsewhere) militant forces in Syria under the guise of attacking terrorists? …
    “The West funded and created Isis to do its bidding in Syria and also to put pressure on an increasingly independent government in Iraq, which refused to allow US troops to remain in the country with immunity from prosecution.”

  2. The socialist Kurdish region of Rojava in Syria has successfully resisted the Islamic State and deserves our solidarity, says DEREK WALL at

    Rojava is an autonomous socialist state with a population of 2.5 million that has recently been formed in the Middle East.
    Rojava community self-defence units (YPG) have been fighting the so-called Islamic State and consistently winning. Yazidis from Mount Singer, under threat of death from the Islamic State, were led to freedom in Rojava by members of the YPG.

    Rojava gained a measure of autonomy from Syria, and its main political party, the Democratic People’s Union, has organised self-defence units called the YPG. The Democratic People’s Union is affiliated to the Kurdish Workers’ Party, commonly referred to as the PKK.

    A long-standing Kurdish revolutionary party, the PKK has been heavily repressed by the Turkish state. In fact much of the rise of the so-called Islamic State can be explained by Turkish opposition to an autonomous Kurdish state.

    Turkey’s border has been closed to Rojava to strangle this new socialist and Kurdish state. In contrast, the border has been open from Turkey to jihadists fighting the Kurds.

    The long-standing PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan was kidnapped in Nairobi in 1991 by the Turkish secret service and remains in prison. PKK and its affiliates are listed as international terrorist organisations by the US, Nato and the EUand is subject to intense repression by Turkey.

    All of us on the left must call for an end to this terrorism listing, demand the release of Ocalan and challenge the role of Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia in supporting fundamentalism.

    PKK and PYD advocate socialism, feminism, freedom of religious belief and pluralism.

Please comment down below