By John Schindler
What exactly is the role of the U.S. Government and its close friends in Syria’s civil war? As that ugly conflict becomes increasingly protracted, with 70,000 lives lost at least, and no resolution in sight, DC whispers – rather loud ones – have it that the Obama administration has been pondering a more direct role in Syria’s fratricide. The Washington Post reported this on February 26, noting, however, “The administration has not provided direct aid to the military or political side of the opposition throughout the two-year-old conflict, and U.S. officials remain opposed to providing weapons to the rebels.” Is that, well, true? Rumors on the spook circuit for some time have spoken of all sorts of indirect military aid to the rebels, and it’s clear the administration’s denial hinges on the precise meaning of “direct aid” and perhaps what “is” is.
Back in January, savvy watchers, particularly the Moses Brown Blog, noted a whole lot of anti-tank weaponry from the former Yugoslavia showing up in the hands of the Syrian resistance. Moreover, the potent weaponry, though light, was having an impact, notably a lot more disabled armor for the Syrian Army. In the Balkans there was much discussion of just whose weapons these were, though those with a close eye quickly fingered Croatia as the main suspect. In the last week of February, the Zagreb daily Jutarnji list ran several articles making clear what had made it into the hands of Syrian rebels. The weapons involved included systems which the Croatian military has a great deal of, indeed an excess, such as M79 Osa (Wasp) and RPG-22 anti-tank rocket launchers, RGB-6 grenade launchers, M60 recoilless rifles: all light and man-portable but lethal systems.
Jutarnji list‘s reporting added that the weapons had reached Syria through a series of flights out of Zagreb’s Pleso airport by IL-76s owned by a Jordanian firm called International Air Cargo, specifically on December 4 and 23, January 6, and February 18. The flights were handled carefully by authorities and had no known manifests. Soon the The New York Times got wind of this and ran a detailed story stating that Saudi money was behind it all – a plausible assertion give the regional dynamics of the Syrian war and Riyadh’s long history of doing just this sort of thing.
Confronted by the allegations, including a lot of videos popping up on YouTube showing Syrian rebels using Croatian weapons in action, Zagreb came out with some non-denial denials, conceding that weapons from Croatian stocks indeed had reached Syria, without explaining exactly how. Significantly, unnamed officials clarified that the Croatian Defense Ministry was not directly involved, while implying that private firms were. In all, more questions than answers. As a safety measure, Croatia removed its UN peacekeepers from the Golan Heights, lest they become an attractive target due to their country’s involvement in Syria’s civil war.
More answers appeared late this week, again in Jutarnji list, which fleshed out its earlier reporting with a lot more detail. It asserted that between November and February, seventy-five flights out of Pleso secretly brought an astonishing 3,000 tons of weaponry to the Syrian resistance. Much of the weaponry came from Croatian stocks, but some was taken from other European countries too, though which ones is not yet clear. Of greatest significance, the report claimed that the entire operation – which involved Croatia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Jordan, plus some help from the United Kingdom – was orchestrated by the Americans. Zagreb got involved when friends in Washington, DC asked them to.
Read the rest here.
John R. Schindler is professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College, where he’s been since 2005, and where he teaches courses on security, strategy, intelligence, terrorism, and occasionally military history.
What does this have to do with an "Economic Policy Journal"?
ReplyDeleteWho knows. The first line of the article is "What exactly is the role of the U.S. Government and its close friends in Syria’s civil war?", but the article spends most of its time talking about how weapons indigenous to the former Yugoslavia made their way to Syria.
DeleteThe connection of the US to the topic of the article is not obvious, but I'm sure Robert can enlighten us. Robert?
1. What does this have to do with an "Economic Policy Journal"?
ReplyDeleteAn elitist funny money regime and its unlimited wars which are funded and enabled by that funny money regime are inextricably intertwined. Duh.
Even uber-Keynesian Daniel Kuehn seems to sense this:
http://bobroddis.blogspot.com/2012/08/daniel-kuehn-provides-factual-basis-for.html
2. The connection of the US to the topic of the article is not obvious
Oh really?
More answers appeared late this week, again in Jutarnji list, which fleshed out its earlier reporting with a lot more detail. It asserted that between November and February, seventy-five flights out of Pleso secretly brought an astonishing 3,000 tons of weaponry to the Syrian resistance. Much of the weaponry came from Croatian stocks, but some was taken from other European countries too, though which ones is not yet clear. Of greatest significance, the report claimed that the entire operation – which involved Croatia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Jordan, plus some help from the United Kingdom – was orchestrated by the Americans. Zagreb got involved when friends in Washington, DC asked them to. End of story.
Jutarnji list
DeleteSo, what is Jutarnji list, anyway? From Wikipedia:
Jutarnji list (trans. "morning paper") is a daily newspaper in Croatia with a circulation of about 66,000 copies.
...
In February 2008 the paper was involved in a scandal when it published a hoax interview with the Croatian then-prime minister Ivo Sanader.
So, Jutarnji list is a marginal paper that publishes interviews that didn't happen. (Apparently this imbues them with credibility.)
Zagreb got involved when friends in Washington, DC asked them to. End of story.
There is no evidence for this. The author doesn't explain how it follows. We're supposed to believe that Croatia sending indigenous weapons (the M60 recoilless rifle and Osa date from the old Yugoslavia) to Syria is somehow magically connected to the US in a way he never quite gets around to explaining.
But that's OK, because the Croatian equivalent of the National Enquirer swears up and down that it's true.
And even if Croatia is sending, er, Croatian weapons to the Syrian rebels, why is that bad? Anti-government agitation is good by definition.
Isn't it? I mean, only a statist would disagree, right?
"And even if Croatia is sending, er, Croatian weapons to the Syrian rebels, why is that bad? Anti-government agitation is good by definition.
DeleteIsn't it? I mean, only a statist would disagree, right?"
Uh, no. Not necessarily. These rebels are not anarchists, for crying out loud. They're mostly Jihadists, who believe in a REAL repressive government.
Doesn't it ever occur to you that all the "Arab Spring" type revolts (most of them OVERTLY) supported materially by the U.S. are replacing secular regimes with Islamic theocracies??
And all this with Hillary's blessings? She of the "women's rights" brigade??
Doesn't it ever occur to you that all the "Arab Spring" type revolts (most of them OVERTLY) supported materially by the U.S. are replacing secular regimes with Islamic theocracies??
ReplyDeleteThat's the point I'm trying to make - most "anarchist", "anti-government" movements are just one bunch of statists trying to draft the rest of the world onto their side. Syria is just one example of many.
Or look at the "anarchists" fighting "austerity" (ie. living within your means) in Europe. Are they our allies? I mean, they're "anarchists", right? They must be big fans of Rothbard.
(And trying to interpret Hillary's behaviour is a fool's errand. She has her eye on 2016.)
Now I'm completely confused, I must admit.
DeleteThe original statement by you : "And even if Croatia is sending, er, Croatian weapons to the Syrian rebels, why is that bad? Anti-government agitation is good by definition." Is what? sarcasm?
If so, well, I dunno, we agree?
For the record:
I agree:
1. That "Arab Spring" is a sham
2. Austerity and "Anarchist" resistance to it is a sham
3. Hillary is a cypher (?) I actually think she is the embodiment of Machiavellianism. e.g. She started out as a Republican!
OK, please tell me where I'm wrong.
BTW, "ntk" is spook talk. Are those your initials, or are you hiding in plain sight?
No rancor here, by the way, I just enjoy discussion.