The Battle for Idlib: Why is There a US Escalation? | New Eastern Outlook

06-09-18 09:34:00,

AMSF452343242

Idlib, which is most probably the last stronghold of terrorists in Syria, is going to face a Syrian offensive in the Syria government’s bid to re-capture the territory it had lost to foreign funded “rebels” few years ago. Re-taking Idlib would also lead war in Syria inches away from conclusion, which would specifically mean a startling defeat for all external elements that were seeking to bring Assad down. It is, therefore, not surprising to note that these elements have already started to stir things up in Syria as part of their plan to intensify the heat. Otherwise, why would the US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, contend that the battle for Idlib would lead to an escalation when, in reality, it would rid Syria of a big terrorist group, numbering 10,000 only in Idlib? How fighting terrorists in Syria is escalation if doing the same thing in Afghanistan isn’t? The answer to this lies in America’s Syria strategy, the linchpin of which was, from the very beginning, “jihadi rebels.” Any battle, therefore, that seeks to eliminate these jihadi rebels would mean “escalation” in Washington; hence, the deliberate escalation through talks of another Syrian “chemical attack” and the US revenge plan.

While there isn’t going to be any “chemical attack” by the Syrian army, as there has never been in the past, it is obvious that the US, by attacking Syrian army targets, would only be protecting the terrorists of Al-Nusra front in Idlib. Certainly, attacking terrorists cannot in any way be escalation, but attacking a standing army, trying to rid its country of jihdis, would certainly cause escalation.

Sensing this, Russia has already announced its Naval drills in the Mediterranean Sea, where it says the US might strike Syria in response to a staged chemical attack by the (US supported) terrorists based in Idlib.

For the US, preventing the takeover of Idlib is necessary because it is its last hope to get back in Syrian end-game. The objective behind creating the “chemical attack” propaganda is obviously to make it as much difficult for Syria and Russia to achieve their objective as possible. As one US official was quoted in a western media report to have said, “Right now, our job is to help create quagmires [for Russia and the Syrian regime] until we get what we want.”

And the intended quagmire is to be based upon a staged chemical attack.

 » Lees verder