Sunday, October 25, 2015

Counter-Terrorism Vs. “Regime Change” in Syria. US-Russia Clash at the UN Security Council

Russia, China, Venezuela Support Counter-Terrorism; US-NATO Seek Regime Change in Syria

  44  2 
Russia held the Presidency of the UN Security Council for the month of September. 
On September 30, the Ministerial level UN Security Council meeting was entitled: Maintenance of International Peace and Security. Settlement of Conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa and Countering the Terrorist Threat in the Region. With stunning intellectual force, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov began the debate, stating:
The euphoria that engulfed many following the Arab Spring changed to horror with the spread of chaos, the escalation of violence, the shadow of religious warfare looming over the region and, of course, the unprecedented terrorist threat. The heinous activities of the Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaida in Iraq, Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, the Yemeni branch of Al-Qaida, Al-Shabaab in Somalia, Boko Haram and other groups have faded in the light of the expansion of the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Across the territories of Iraq and Syria, ISIL has created an extremist quasi-State on the ground that possesses a vast repressive apparatus, stable sources of income, a well-equipped army and elements of weapons of mass destruction.
ISIL cells are flourishing in Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Its announced plans include the capture of Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem and the spread of its evil activities to Europe, Central and South-East Asia, and Russia. These terrorists carry out mass killings and public executions, and threaten the very existence of various ethno-religious groups, including Christians, Kurds and Alawites. ISIL has a professional propaganda machine active in dozens of languages……Unless we learn the lessons to be drawn from the reckless, mistaken adventures undertaken over the past 10 or 12 years, we will not be successful…Russia’s multi-ethnic and multireligious character gives us unique experience when it comes to peaceful coexistence among different ethnic groups and religious communities.
Next, Wang Yi, China’s brilliant Foreign Minister, captured in a single image, and with heartrending immediacy, the intolerable human dimension of this crisis, stating: “Wars and Conflicts, humanitarian disasters and terrorist threats are interlinked. The image of the drowned 3-year old Syrian boy is an affront to human morality and strikes at the conscience of the international community…In the twenty-first century, the coexistence of civilizations requires the spirit of harmony without imposed uniformity…..People need a Middle East of self-advancement. The Middle East is the home of all the peoples in that region. Therefore, its future and destiny should be determined by those same countries, through consultation. Countries outside of the region may provide help but should avoid interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and – even more importantly – avoid imposing a specific model on them.
Venezuela’s Foreign Minister, Mrs. Rodriguez Gomez boldly declared:
We should also be talking about the social and economic model that breeds poverty and misery….what has the Arab Spring done for these peoples? Has it brought them greater happiness and more democrary? Because what we are hearing today we have heard before, all in the name of democracy, freedom and the people’s welfare. The unilateral, imperialistic interventions we have witnessed have bypassed this Organization, contravened the Charter and made people less equal and more unhappy. What has been the result in Iraq, in Libya, in Afghanistan? The destruction of sovereign States. And now what do we want to do for Syria? The same thing? Can it be that the terrible photograph of a little Syrian boy on a seashore does not affect us or touch our souls and our hearts?
How many more children must we see die? We have heard all of this before. I must say it frankly to the world, all of those imperialist wars have been preceded by media wars and lies. It was lies that led to the interventions by those countries in the Middle East and North Africa, and 10 years later, they say that yes, it was a lie, but we made mistakes and we have learned a lesson. But what we see is that no lessons have been learned…..Today in Syria, there are more than 500 terrorist groups. Who is funding them? We need an answer to that question. Who is training them and giving them logistical support? What we see are the vicious cycles of imperialism. They are the cycles that first destroy nations and States and then create a space where terrorist groups can proliferate….There should be no excuses about how we do not like a particular leader. The Arab spring has already showed us what can happen then. We must stop choosing that false and immoral course of action. If we truly want a safer and less violent world, we must fight the causes of terrorism and not its consequences, which is a pretext to intervene in other countries and trample on the Charter of the United Nations.
US Secretary of State John Kerry unsurprisingly did not address the socio-economic root causes that breed terrorism, and evidently, having learned nothing from the disastrous consequences of regime change in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, called for regime change in Syria as the solution to the problem of terrorism in the region. He stated:
“Pursuant to those procedures in Syria over the past year, the coalition has now conducted nearly 3,000 airstrikes against ISIL targets, and we are now in position, with France, Australia, Canada, Turkey and other coalition partners joining the campaign, to dramatically accelerate our efforts. That is what we will do…One thing is certain: the vast majority of States represented around this table know that the ISIL forces and ISIL itself cannot be defeated as long as Bashar Al-Assad remains president of Syria. It cannot happen by definition of the lines of this battle. It cannot happen because of who has lined up with whom and because of the nature of these protagonists…Al-Assad will never be accepted by those whom he has harmed; it will never be possible for him to become a legitimate leader in future or to lead a reconciliation or unification of the country. That cannot happen until he makes clear his willingness to actually heal the nation, end the war and decline to be part of the long-term future.”
The primary goal of US-NATO policy from the inception of this crisis in Syria, 5 years ago, has been regime change, the destruction of the secular government of President Assad, which had guaranteed women’s empowerment, a goal that US-NATO claims to defend, along with other social safety nets. Failing to obtain UN Security Council authorization for military action against Assad, following three Chapter VII resolutions that were vetoed three times by both Russia and China, US-NATO initially resorted to unilateral covert action, relentlessly escalating the crisis by arming so-called “moderate” rebel groups.
On October 13, The New York Times reported:
“The American-made TOW anti-tank missiles began arriving in the region in 2013, through a covert program run by the United States, Saudi Arabia and other allies to help certain CIA-vetted insurgent groups battle the Syrian government. The weapons are delivered to the field by American allies, but the United States approves their destination. The CIA program that delivered the TOWS (an acronym for tube-launched, optically-tracked wire-guided missiles) is separate from and significantly larger than the failed $500,000,000 Pentagon program that was cancelled last week after it trained only a handful of fighters. Rebel c ommanders scoffed when asked about reports of the delivery of 500 TOWs from Saudi Arabia, saying it was an insignificant number compared with what is available. Saudi Arabia in 2013 ordered more than 13,000 of them. Given that American weapons contracts require disclosure of the “end user,” insurgents said they were being delivered with Washington’s approval. One official with a rebel group that is fighting in Hama called the weapons supply “carte blanche.” ‘We can get as much as we need and whenever we need them.’”
As the conflict escalated, incubating ISIS, US-NATO forces underwent multiple contortions in an effort to legitimize their incitement of civil war in Syria, a war intended to result in the destruction of the government of President Assad.
On August 22, 2014 the New York Times headline announced:
U.S. General Says Raiding Syria is Key to Halting Isis: Airstrikes in Iraq are seen as inadequate to defeat a Foe that Crosses Borders.” On August 29, 2014 the New York Times headline announces: “Asking Congress to Back ISIS Strikes in Syria is Tricky for Obama,” and, with a classic Orwellian distortion, on September 24, the New York Times headlines announces: “U.S. Invokes Defense of Iraq in Legal justification of Syria Strikes.’ The article continues the contorted Orwellian attempt at justification, alleging that the American-led airstrikes against the Islamic State – carried out in Syria without seeking the permission of the Syrian government, or the United Nations Security Council – were legal because they were done ‘in defense of Iraq.’ The September 24 article continues: “International law generally prohibits using force on the sovereign territory of another country without its permission or authorization from the United Nations, except as a matter of self-defense. American intelligence agencies have concluded that the Islamic State poses no immediate threat to the United States.
One year later, and 3,000 US-Coalition airstrikes later, ostensibly against ISIL targets in Syria, and ISIS is thriving, and spreading, as described on October 14, 2015: “Chaos Swells for Afghan Civilians as ISIS Branch Makes Inroads Against Taliban.’ The New York Times reports: ‘The Islamic State has made major inroads in turf battles against Taliban commanders, particularly in places in Nangarhar province like the Maamand Valley. And the result, rather than weakening the overall insurgency, has mostly been to inflict more chaos and misery for Afghan civilians…But one big difference soon became obvious: the fighters were suddenly flush with cash’”
In his September 28, 2015 speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Russian President Putin declared:
Suffice it to look at the situation in the Middle East and North Africa. Certainly, political and social problems in this region have been piling up for a long time. And people there wished for changes. But how did it actually turn out? Rather than bringing about reforms, an aggressive foreign interference has resulted in a flagrant destruction of national institutions and the lifestyle itself. Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress we got violence, poverty and social disaster. And nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life
I cannot help asking those who have caused this situation: do you realize now what you have done? But I am afraid no one is going to answer that. Indeed, policies based on self-conceit, and belief in one’s excptionality and impunity have never been abandoned. It is now obvious that the power vacuum created in some countries of the Middle East and North Africa led to emergence of anarchy areas. Those immediately started to be filled with extremists and terrorists. Tens of thousands of militants are fighting under the banners of the so-called ‘Islamic State.’ Its ranks include former Iraqi servicemen who were thrown out into the street after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Many recruits also come from Libya, a country whose statehood was destroyed as a result of a gross violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1973.
‘And now the ranks of radicals are being joined by the members of the so-called ‘moderate’ Syrian opposition supported by the Western countries . First they are armed and trained, and then they defect to the Islamic State. Besides, the Islamic State itself did not just come from nowhere. It was also initially forged as a tool against undesirable secular regimes.’ ‘We believe that any attempts to play games with terrorists, let alone to arm them, are not just short-sighted, but ‘fire-hazardous.’ This may result in the global terrorist threat increasing dramatically and engulfing new regions. Especially given that Islamic State camps train militants from many countries, including the European countries. Unfortunately, Russia is not an exception. We cannot allow these criminals who have already felt the smell of blood, to return back home and continue their evil doings. No one wants this to happen, does he? Russia has always been firm and consistent in opposing terrorism in all its forms. Today, we provide military and technical assistance both to Iraq and Syria that are fighting terrorist groups. We think it is an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government and its Armed Forces, who are valiantly fighting terrorism face-to-face. We should finally acknowledge that no one but President Assad’s Armed Forces and Kurd Militia are truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria.’
More than one year and 3,000 US-Coalition airstrikes later, the US-Coalition forces have failed to defeat or even weaken ISIS, which now raises legitimate questions about US-Coalition ineptitude, or worse, the sinister possibility of its collusion with ISIS. As the scourge of ISIS has metastasized, Russia has suddenly increased its military support of Syrian President Assad’s struggle against ISIS, very much to the shock and dismay of US-Coalition forces. With breathtaking effrontery, on October 1, USA Today headlined: “U.S. Rebukes Russian Strike: Russia launched its first airstrike in Syria on Wednesday after its military buildup in the embattled country, drawing a sharp rebuke from the United States and raising tensions further in the region. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter called Russian policy in Syria ‘ill-advised,’ and said it was ‘doomed to fail.’”
In view of the failure of 3,000 US-Coalition airstrikes to curtail the spread of ISIS, Carter’s own remarks would appear to be ‘ill-advised.’ That same day, The New York Times reported: “Russian aircraft carried out a bombing attack against Syrian opposition fighters on Wednesday, including at least one group trained by the CIA, eliciting angry protests from American officials….Russia’s entry into the Syrian conflict, foreshadowed by a rapid military buildup in the past three weeks at an airbase in Latakia, Syria, makes the possibility of a political settlement in Syria more difficult.”
The Russian participation, in response to the failed US-Coalition attempt to defeat ISIS, should have been welcomed with enthusiasm, if the US-Coalition goal was to defeat ISIS. An alliance of forces would have been recognized as a desperately needed strengthening of any genuine counter-terrorism effort. But, taken by surprise, and off-guard, the US-Coalition’s alarmed response exposed the fact that counter-terrorism is not their goal, or their agenda. Their purpose is regime change, and the destruction of the existing government infrastructure of Syria, reducing Syria to the dangerously chaotic rubble that regime change has already caused in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan.
The reality of the US-Russia proxy war in Syria is inescapable. A NATO encircled Russia is striking back in defense of its base in Syria. And the cold war paranoia about resurgent Russian militarism is being resurrected to reinvigorate NATO. On October 15, The New York Times stated: “In a report this month for the European Council on Foreign Relations, Gustav Gressel argued that Mr. Putin had overseen the most rapid transformation of the country’s armed forces since the 1930’s. ‘Russia is now a military power that could overwhelm any of its neighbors, if they were isolated from Western support, wrote Mr. Gressel, a former officer of the Austrian military.”
This paranoia will guarantee the astronomical profits of the military-industrial complex, while driving the world to the boiling point of possible nuclear war in Ukraine, Syria, and now other regions.

It’s Official: Obama Rejects Fighting Terrorism in Syria

  56  0 
His actions say it all. In over a year of bombing, US warplanes struck zero Syrian and Iraqi terrorist targets – none. It’s unsurprising he rejected Putin’s offer to cooperate in fighting ISIS and other terrorist groups.
On Saturday, Sergey Lavrov said the following:
We are ready to back the patriotic opposition, including the so-called Free Syrian Army, with our air support (in jointly fighting ISIS and other terrorist groups).
However, Washington is refusing to inform us of the locations of the terrorists and where the opposition is based. The most important thing for us is to find people who will be true representatives of the armed groups who will confront terrorism among other things (serving the interests of Syrian people, not foreign powers).
Russia is “the only country…support(ing) all political forces in Syria (concerned about maintaining its sovereignty). Foreign players” must have no says about internal politics, decisions for Syrians alone.
We have to make them choose their own process for how their country should live on and protect the interests of every confessional, ethnic or political group.
“Of course, this work should be done in preparation for elections, both parliamentary and presidential” – free from foreign interference.
Putin stressed similar sentiments, saying Russia’s intervention “will not solve all problems, but it will create conditions for the main thing – a beginning of a political process to encompass all healthy patriotic forces of the Syrian society,” concerned about a future free from foreign interference and domination.
Putin and other Russian officials reject Washington’s demand for Assad to go. That’s for Syrians alone to decide. Assad’s red carpet welcome in Moscow shows Moscow’s solidarity with Syria against the scourge of terrorism, along with directly challenging Washington destructive imperial agenda.
Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov made similar comments on BBC’s Hardtalk program, saying:
Unfortunately all our ‘partners’ (sic) have failed up to now to identify a serious opposition that has no links to terror, no links with extremist organizations, no links with ISIL, Al Qaeda and others.
He politely stopped short of explaining reality on the ground. US-recruited, funded, armed, trained and directed ISIS and other terrorist groups alone are fighting Syria’s government.
No moderates exist. The so-called Free Syrian Army is more myth than reality – terrorists alone fighting Assad, imported from scores of countries, non-Syrians, wanting the nation’s sovereignty destroyed, serving their own interests and Washington’s, seeking unchallenged regional control.
Peskov stressed the importance of preserving Syria’s “territorial and political integrity, not to let the whole region, including the countries that are bordering with Syria, go into a nightmare of collapse and hegemony of terror.”
Russia wants Syria saved “from terrorists and extremist organizations.” It wants their scourge kept from spreading. It intervened because Washington failed to fight terrorism as promised. It’s part of the problem, not the solution.
Media reports about Russia joining forces with Syrian opposition groups against Assad are false. Lavrov was clear and unequivocal saying Moscow supports all Syrian elements against terrorism, a scourge vital to contain and defeat.
After meeting with his Russian, Turkish, and Saudi counterparts in Vienna, John Kerry lied claiming Washington supports “a global effort of all people of conscience, and nations, to do everything possible to bring (war in Syria) to a close.”
Obama didn’t wage it preemptively in 2011 to quit. US policy fundamentally opposes peace and stability. Endless violence and chaos serve its imperial agenda. An atmosphere of calm and lawfulness defeat it.
Kerry’s sole aim is furthering America’s hegemonic aims, endless wars of aggression its main strategy, millions of lost lives a small price to pay. Conquest and domination alone matter, an agenda reflecting pure evil.
The choice for freedom-loving people everywhere is clear. Defeating this monster is top priority. End its scourge or it’ll end us.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Moscow’s Stance Against US-Supported Terrorism. Obama versus JFK

EDITOR'S CHOICE | 24.10.2015 | 14:07
Putin is committed to peace, stability, respect for nation-state sovereignty. The alternative is endless wars of aggression leading to a possible global confrontation involving nuclear weapons. The unthinkable is more threatening now than at any time in the post-WW II era – far more serious than during the 1962 missiles of October crisis.
Kennedy later explained he “never had the slightest intention of” attacking or invading Cuba. He wanted all US troops out of Vietnam. He called for ending the Cold War, abolishing nuclear weapons, a “general and complete disarmament,” and Washington no longer using its might to force Pax Americana on other world nations.
His moral stand for peace and stability got him assassinated. Obama is no Jack Kennedy – waging naked aggression against multiple countries throughout his tenure. He’s furious about Assad’s “red carpet welcome” in Moscow, showing Putin’s solidarity with Syria against the scourge of terrorism, as well as directly challenging Washington’s imperial agenda.
Deputy White House press secretary Eric Schultz lied, accusing Assad of “us(ing) chemical weapons against his own people, and saying his “red carpet welcome” in Moscow is “at odds with the stated goal by the Russians for a political transition in Syria.”
Fact: US-imported terrorists alone used sarin gas and other chemical weapons against Syrian civilians multiple times.
Fact: US special forces and other Pentagon operatives trained ISIS and other terrorist elements in chemical weapons use.
Fact: Putin, Sergey Lavrov and other Russian officials many times said Syrians alone may decide who’ll lead them, never any foreign power. Interfering in the internal affairs of other countries flagrantly violates core international law.
Numerous times throughout the conflict, Assad said he’d step down if Syrians reject his leadership. In June 2014, they overwhelmingly reelected him in a process independent monitors called open, free and fair.
In an early October interview on Iran’s Khabar TV, he explained “(f)rom the beginning, it was clear to us that there were foreign hands behind terrorism in Syria.”
Washington, Israel and rogue partners want to “perpetuate the process of erosion in Syria and Iraq and later other countries of the region, so that we all remain weak for decades and maybe generations.”
They’re not fighting terrorism. They support it, using it to subjugate other nations, wanting them transformed into vassal states, their resources stolen and people exploited.
Syria’s coalition with Russia, Iran and Iraq “must succeed,” said Assad. “Otherwise, the whole region, not only one or two countries, will be destroyed.”
Russia’s goal is defeating terrorism, preventing its spread into more Middle East countries, Russia, Central Asia and elsewhere, preserving Syrian sovereignty, and challenging the scourge of US imperialism – the greatest threat to world peace and stability.
Assad’s welcome in Moscow was an important show of solidarity against evil forces vital to defeat – Putin at the same time saying: “The decisive word, without any doubt, must belong to the Syrian people,” a strong statement telling Washington and rogue partners to keep hands off.
Both leaders want ongoing conflict resolved politically, Syrians alone deciding who’ll lead them. National sovereignty is inviolable, freedom impossible without it.
The New York Times-led media lying machine can’t tolerate the notion of Russia, Syria and other nations allying against Washington’s hegemonic agenda.
The latest Times Big Lie headlined “Assad Finds Chilly Embrace in Moscow Trip” – belying Putin’s warm hospitality, what the White House called Assad’s “red carpet welcome.”
The usual disreputable Times sources were cited – unnamed “officials, diplomats and (so-called) analysts,” imperial supporters, presenting one-sided views, Big Lies serving their interests, suppressing important hard truths.
Putin and Assad have a common goal – defeating terrorism, preventing its spread, preserving Syrian sovereignty, and challenging Washington’s ruthless imperial agenda
Stephen Lendman,

Strategic Engineered Migration as Weapon of War

Leonid SAVIN | 25.10.2015 | 19:09

After reading the title, you may think it is describing the phenomenon that Europe has recently been facing: the hundreds of thousands of refugees, both victims of the hardships of civil wars and opportunists, who are invading the Balkans by land and by sea and then making their way further, trying to reach richer countries like Germany, France and Scandinavia by any means possible.
It would seem that this stream of refugees has objective reasons: armed conflicts and wars have been going on in Libya, Syria and Iraq for many years, while the situation is also turbulent in Palestine and Afghanistan. In Tunisia and Egypt, meanwhile, both of which experienced the Arab Spring, the situation also leaves much to be desired. Hardly anybody is taking notice of Bahrain, where opposition protests have been brutally suppressed for years, while in Yemen, air strikes are even being carried out on wedding processions. The location of these two states is not very convenient, however – there is simply nowhere to flee. There is also another important detail: camps are being built for Muslim refugees in Saudi Arabia, but nobody is going there for some reason. As a last resort, they stay in Jordan and Turkey.
Is there also some general reason for their frantic desire to flee so far from their homeland? Wealthy relatives who have already settled in the European Union, perhaps? Or stories about welfare benefits on which they will be able to live comfortably? After all, to make such a journey they have to pay handsomely for the services of smugglers. According to some reports, these smugglers take between $4,000 and $10,000 to transport a single refugee from Syria or Libya to Europe. Even if this person has wealthy relatives abroad, receiving money via bank transfer is impossible in war-torn Syria. Organising transportation on credit clearly involves certain guarantees, especially considering that the boats often sink in the Mediterranean.
Who is providing guarantees that encourage hundreds of thousands of people to rush from other continents to Europe and why?
Researchers have discovered a very interesting fact related to the use of social networking sites. It has come to light that calls on Twitter for refugees to travel to Germany have mostly come from the US. The time spent practising in other countries has not been in vain – from Iran during the 2009 presidential elections to Egypt and Tunisia, where the role played by social networking sites in mobilising the population was considerable.
What we are seeing now is the practical implementation of theoretical calculations of a strategic nature. Such strategies have been under development for a long time. One of them is a study by the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University that bears the name «Strategic Engineered Migration as a Weapon of War», which the author also uses for the title of this article. The study was first published in 2008 in the Civil Warsjournal. Using a combination of statistical data and case study analysis, the author of the work, Kelly Greenhill, provides answers to the following questions: can refugees be a specific type of weapon, can this weapon only be used in wartime or in peacetime as well, and just how successful can its exploitation be? On the whole, Greenhill answers these questions in the affirmative.
In fact, researchers at the Belfer Center, along with researchers from other departments at Harvard University, have been working on designing strategies for conflict management in the context of broader foreign policy issues for many years. The director of the Belfer Center, Graham Allison, was an assistant secretary of defence in the Clinton administration. As well as this, the Center also funds the research of a special task force devoted to Russia.
The US is only pretending to sympathise with Europe, which is being hit hard by the migratory wave. In a recent article by Richard Haass, president of the influential globalist organisation Council on Foreign Relations that deals with European issues, the use of the word «managing” with regard to the migration crisis in the European Union was no accident. Savouring the problems being faced by Europe as a result of the influx of refugees, Haass notes that the US has both an obligation to help the European Union and strategic interests with regard to Germany and Europe as a whole. Despite this «obligation to help”, however, there has been no help at all from the US either in controlling the illegal infiltration of European countries or in terms of the temporary settlement of refugees.
There is also another interesting fact. On 15 September, Barack Obama signed an executive order on the use of behavioural science techniques in public administration. The most recent branch of behaviourism, known as «Nudge”, is nothing more than the latest way to manipulate people. The hand of Cass Sunstein, who previously worked at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama administration, can clearly be seen here. Along with a British colleague, he co-authored the book Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness, in which psychological manipulation techniques in the context of everyday life are hidden behind fine words. (Incidentally, Sunstein’s wife is Samantha Power, United States Ambassador to the UN.) There is no doubt that the ‘nudge’ technique will be used far beyond the borders of the US.
The most effective weapon, however, both metaphorically and literally, may be those migrants capable of setting up a small guerrilla group to carry out subversive terrorist acts on the new territory. It is rather interesting that the US is not just playing host to the ones who seem the most ‘promising’ for this, but is also granting them refugee and resident status as well as the official protection of the US government.
As far as one can judge from a recently leaked internal document, a special report to US Congress for the 2014 financial year on the issue of migration prepared by the US Department of Homeland Security states that in 2014, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services applied 1,519 exemptions to individual applicants granted refugee status, resident status, and the official protection of the US government. And the most interesting thing is that in one way or another, all of these people have links with terrorist groups and extensive experience of subversive activities.
The list includes old allies of Washington from among Cuban exiles, Kosovo Liberation Army militants who for some reason cannot live well in their own artificially created state, and many other covert and overt allies of the US. There are members of the Nationalist Republican Alliance from Salvador, most likely those who shot political opponents during the Cold War and are now hiding from justice. There are fighters from the Democratic Movement for the Liberation of Eritrean Kunama – ethno-separatists who are opposed to the Eritrean government. There is the Tigray People’s Liberation Front from Ethiopia and the Oromo Liberation Front from the same country.
The list also includes activists from the Burmese Chin National Front and its military wing, the Chin National Army, which are members of the so-called Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO). Members of the Karen National Union, including militants of the Karen National Liberation Army (an ethnic group living in Burma and Thailand) also received a quota to live in the US on the spot.
Refugee status was given to 49 former Iraqi citizens from the Iraqi Democratic Party, the Kurdish Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. The list of «1,519 exemptions” also includes members of other organisations that have devoted many years to armed conflicts.
One can only speculate on the kind of future wars the US has in mind if it is planning to use such specific migrants as a weapon.
Tags: European Union ISIS Middle East US