Although several peace projects are currently circulating in the chanceries, Thierry Meyssan points out their inadequacy for this sort of war. According to him, those who begin with an amputated analysis of the conflict, yet still believe they are doing the right thing, will not only fail to resolve the problem, but will pave the way for a new war. It is imperative to treat the ideological question as a priority.

*

Syria should soon be experiencing the end of armed hostilities on the whole of its territory, with the exception of the areas occupied by Turkey and the United States. The international Press is now focused on the return of the refugees, the reconstruction of the areas of devastation, and preventing the return of European jihadists. But these questions are secondary compared with two others.

End the war

Since 2001, the Pentagon has adopted the doctrine of Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, Donald Rumsfeld’s choice for Director of the Office of Force Transformation. The objective is no longer to grab natural resources for the USA, but to control the access of other powers to these resources. For that, it will be necessary to maintain indefinitely a state of chaos that only US Forces can contain. According the formula of President George W. Bush, this is to be an “endless war”, which the USA must neither lose nor win [1].

So the war against Libya has been dragging on for seven years, the war against Iraq has smouldered for fifteen, and the war on Afghanistan is perennial since 2001. Despite all the soothing words, none of these countries has known peace since they were hit by the Pentagon.

The story will be the same for Syria as long as the United States has not officially abandoned the Cebrowski doctrine. Admittedly, President Donald Trump had announced his intention to put an end to “American imperialism” and return to a form of “hegemony”. However, despite his efforts, he does not seem to have succeeded.

It is not clear whether the announcement by General James Mattis (Secretary of Defense) and by Michael Pompeo (Secretary of State) concerning the desire of the United States to re-establish peace in Yemen within thirty days should be interpreted as the end of a Saudi initiative or the end of the Cebrowski doctrine [2].

Eliminate the jihadist ideology

While the events in Syria were presented as a civil war, it was without doubt an ideological conflict. The two principal slogans of the demonstrations of 2011 were:

- ‘Allah, Syria, freedom!’ (the last word does not signify Western-style political freedom, but the freedom to apply Sharia law).

- ‘Christians in Beïrut, the Alaouites in their graves!’

The conflict is far deeper than we think it is. The initial watchwords were not aimed at the Syrian Arab Republic, nor at President Bachar el-Assad, but at the very essence of Syrian civilisation. The goal was to put an end to a multi-confessional society without equivalent anywhere in the world, and to install in its place an imposed lifestyle which conforms to the principles of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Syria is a space in which everyone can freely practice their religion and help others to practice theirs. The Umayyad Mosque in Damascus is a sanctuary built around the relic of the head of John the Baptist. For centuries, every day without exception, Jews [3], Christians and Muslims pray together.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not a religious group, but a political fraternity. It is organised on the model of the European Masonic lodges that many of their founders used to frequent. Its members militate within a number of public political parties and jihadist groups. Every single jihadi chief without exception, from Oussama Ben Laden to Abou Bakr al-Baghdadi, is either a member or an ex-member of the Brotherhood.

The ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood claims that there are two types of action – those which, according to the ideology, are authorised by God, and those which He forbids [4]. Consequently, it divides the world into two – the servants of God and the enemies of God. Finally, it glorifies those who follow this conception of the actions authorised by God, and encourages the massacre of those who do not.

This ideology is professed by the Saudi preachers (even if today they condemn the Brotherhood, preferring their own royal family), as well as by the Turkish and Qatari governments. This ideology is not only at work in the war against Syria, but also in all the jihadist attacks committed everywhere in the world.

Supposing that the United States were ready for peace with Syria, it would not be possible unless the General Assembly of the United Nations, or failing that, the Security Council, were to explicitly condemn the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. As a result, peace in Syria would ease the situation in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, and would participate in the weakening of international terrorism.

It is therefore dangerous to speak of a “general amnesty” when in fact we need to expose and judge the crimes which may be attributed to this ideology. Just as at the end of the Second World War, the ideologists and apologists of Nazism were judged, in the same way we should judge today those who spread this ideology. And, unlike Nuremberg, we need to pursue this goal in respect of the rule of law, whereas at Nuremberg, certain retroactive texts were used. Let this be clear – the important thing is not to condemn individuals, but to understand an ideology in order to eliminate it.

In 1945, the USSR/ Russia reconstructed itself around the one heroic exploit that all its citizens shared – the fight against the racial ideology of Nazism. In other words, they stood for the affirmation that all human beings are equal and that all people are worthy of respect. In the same way, Syria can only rebuild around the struggle against the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood – the affirmation that all human beings are equal and that all religions are worthy of respect.

Since the Muslim Brotherhood has enjoyed, and still enjoys, the support of the United Kingdom [5], it will not be possible to judge their leaders. But no matter, what counts is that the ideas and the crimes to which they lead directly must be publicly exposed.

Conclusion

A war always ends with the victors and the vanquished. This war has destroyed lives not only in Syria, but also in France and Belgium, in China and Russia, and in many other countries. Peace must therefore be conceived of not only in terms of local realities, but also of the crimes committed by the jihadists in other states.

Given that the 124 states who touted themselves as “Friends of Syria” have lost the military confrontation, but acting through the proxy of mercenaries, very often experienced no military losses on their own territory, they are not ready to accept their defeat and are seeking only to dissimulate their responsibilities for the crimes committed. Not only can there be no peace in Syria unless we condemn the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, but this war will continue in other countries if we fail to do so.

Notes

[1] The Pentagon’s New Map, Thomas P. M. Barnett, Putnam Publishing Group, 2004. “The US military project for the world”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 22 August 2017.

 [2] “James Mattis Remarks at the United States Institute for Peace”, by James Mattis, 30 October 2018. “Michael R. Pompeo : Ending the Conflict in Yemen”, by Mike Pompeo, 31 October 2018. “Washington wants to put an end to the war in Yemen”, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Voltaire Network, 1 November 2018.

[3] Since 1967, most Syrian Jews have left their country for Israël. However, many foreign Jewish visitors continue to come and pray at the Great Mosque.

[4] Ma’alim fi tarîq, Sayyid Qutb, 1964. Version française : Jalons sur la route de l’islam, Sayyid Qutb, Ar-Rissala.

[5] Must read : "The Arab Spring as experienced by the Muslim Brotherhood”, the only study currently available of the international history of the Brotherhood. In Sous nos yeux, Thierry Meyssan, Demi-Lune 2017. To be published in english very soon under the title Right Before our Eyes.

Courtesy Thierry Meyssan; Translation Pete Kimberley

http://www.voltairenet.org/article203743.html