Featured Post

Man behind the Curtain for al-Qaeda in Syria is Assad

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad wanted the recent Geneva II peace conference to focus on terrorism. He says terrorism is the main problem a...

Sunday, September 21, 2014

Vijay Prashad's Syrian contradictions

Vijay Prashad's latest defense of Bashar al-Assad, Obama’s Syrian dilemma, is a bundle of contradictions . The only thing that holds it together is his covert support for Assad.

Vijay says near the very beginning of his piece:
In Syria, IS faces three adversaries: Kurdish fighters, the Syrian government and an assortment of the Syrian opposition.
This is a laugh, after all that has been written on this score, Vijay still counts Assad as a force fighting ISIS in Syria. Sure there have been a few outbreaks but on balance, Assad has been much more friend than foe to ISIS.

The sad news this week is that ISIS has succeeded in taking 60 villages away from the badly out-gunned Syrian Kurdish forces and sending another 60,000 of Assad's citizens fleeing across the border to Turkey. The Kurds don't have an air force, but Assad does, well supplied by Putin. So why was Assad's air force MIA, while ISIS took another slice out of Syria? Were they too busy bombing Syrians demanding democracy in Aleppo and Idlib? Vijay takes the position that Obama should team up with Assad to battle ISIS in Syria, rather than those who are really fighting ISIS. In fact, near the end of his piece Vijay seems to contradicted himself when he excuses Assad's failure to take the fight to ISIS with:
Mr. Assad will not throw his troops at the IS unless he has an assurance that the rebellion against him is over.
So if Assad has yet to throw his troops at the IS [i.e. ISIS], while the Free Syrian Army certainly has, in what sense is he an adversary of IS, to be named ahead of those that have actually been fighting it? This statement is also an admission that both Vijay and Assad know that IS is not a part of the rebellion against him!

Vijay goes on to confuse rhetoric with reality when he speaks of:
Mr. Obama’s commitment to the overthrow of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
Based on what does he make this claim? Is it like Obama's "commitment" to a living wage, affordable healthcare, and clean energy? If Obama has been so "committed to the overthrow of Assad," why is this morning's CNN headline "US plans to arm Syrian rebels", sometime in the future, 3.5 years into the conflict? Vijay seems to recognize this problem near the end of his piece when he says:
Mr. Obama’s gesture appears resolute, but empty...
Another woeful contradiction. Then he revives an old slander to attack Assad's real opposition:
It is little wonder then that on December 11, 2013, his fighters (along with the al-Nusra) conducted a massacre of Alawites, Christians, Ismailis and Druze in Adra (north-east of Damascus).
This one really ticks me off, especially since Vijay affects, excuse me, has a detailed knowledge of the players in this fight. Assad propaganda seems to never die, in the words of his supporters, no matter how completely if has been exposed, in this case even by me: Fake Adra massacre photos expose bloody hands on Left. There have been other good take-downs of this Assad propaganda including The Massacre in Syria That Wasn’t by the Interpreter Magazine, so Vijad really has no excuse for playing dumb and raising it here again, but as we have seen, time and time again with "anti-imperialist" and pro-Assad propaganda, a good lie never dies.

For example, never mind that the Free Syrian Army is still a potent force in the struggle for democracy in spite of the lack of any real support from Obama and the NATO countries or the horrific attacks they have suffered from a regime that has enjoyed almost unlimited military support from its Russian and Iranian allies, and over looking the fact the regime let many of the jihadists that found their way to ISIS out of his jails, Syrian security officers have been seen in the leadership of ISIS or that Assad buys its oil, Vijay is prepared to blame the democratic forces for the rise of ISIS because they have had the gall to demand an end to the fascist regime:
The rebels remain obdurate that Mr. Assad must go, even if this means delivery of Syria to the Islamic State.
This line, that the only choice for Syria is ISIS or Assad, is straight out of Assad's play book and more than anything exposes which side Vijay is on.

The rebellion is not finished by a long shot:

Click here for a list of my other blogs on Syria

1 comment:

  1. the bundle of contradictions is your support for islamic terrorism ...even of the FSA type
    Syrians support Assad not turkey basked FSA or any othern US front group

    ReplyDelete