Tuesday, July 4, 2017

Sykes-Picot 2 will not fix Sykes-Picot 1

If you want proof that the peaceful coexistence – which the system of Liberal Democracy is said to engender – is but a bubble of fake promises, you have it now.

It is that the Jewish inspired English speaking print and electronic media are currently being flooded with arguments to the effect that the Sykes-Picot arrangement, which held for about a century, should be dismantled and replaced by a similar system … with a small difference. Whereas Sykes-Picot 1 was designed to serve the interests of colonial powers France and Britain, Sykes-Picot 2 is designed to pretend serving the interests of America but will serve the interests of Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel.

One article making this kind of argument, however obliquely it does it, came under the title: “Confronting the current Middle East alignment,” and the subtitle: “The Trump administration must define a security strategy for the region.” It was written by James A. Lyons and published on July 2, 2017 in The Washington Times. What follows is a condensed version of the passages that describe the new plan:

“A key element of our strategy should be to support the referendum for Iraqi Kurdistan. Secretary of State Tillerson opposes it because of a misguided objective to keep Iraq intact. But Iraq is already fractured as is Syria, and neither one will be reconstituted in the pre-WWI boundaries. Clearly, the 1916 Sykes-Picot nation-state arrangement has collapsed. Our strategy should also support Syrian Kurds carving out their own sphere of influence which could eventually unite with Iraqi Kurdistan. Damascus cannot control a federalized Syria. Therefore, our strategic plan must back Sunni forces that have shown to be anti-Damascus and non-jihadist. The group that falls into that category is the Free Syrian Army, which will need to be reinforced”.

In other words, James Lyons says the problem with Sykes-Picot 1 is that the colonial powers of yesteryear made the mistake of creating the full-blown nation-states of Syria and Iraq. No, no, no, says he who takes his cues from the neocons; France and Britain should have done something else. Without repeating word for word what the neocons are advocating, Lyons describes how to cut-up those two states into smaller rumps, and how to “cantonize” the rumps into separate entities.

This has been the Jewish dream for decades. The Jews implemented it in Palestine, and it worked for them. Originally, things happened this way: Having gained control of Gaza and the West Bank, the Jews discovered that the situation worked for them because the physical separation of the two parts allowed them to better control the Palestinians. And so, after they were kicked out of Gaza, they got the idea of cantonizing the West Bank, which they did by building settlements in the strategic locations that denied the Palestinians the possibility to create a contiguous nation-state of their own. And the Jews were happy with that result.

It then occurred to them that doing the same thing in the entire Levant will make them masters of the region. The trouble is that they knew they could not do it alone. This is why they started working on the Americans in a brazen attempt to get control of their military, and have it do the dirty work for them. To that end, they recruited people like James A. Lyons and taught them how to pretend advocating what was good for America, when in reality they advocated what will be good for Israel, always Israel and no one but Israel.

Here is how Lyons put it at the start of his article: “There are clearly new dynamics coming into play. What is taking place is a realignment of the regional balance of power. How it evolves will have a major impact on U.S. security interests, and those of our allies, Israel in particular.” Which is why he concludes as follows near the end of the article: “Accordingly, the Trump team must first define a strategy for the region. Such strategy must be predicated on reconstruction of the U.S. military capability and demonstration of the will to project power”.

In other words, he admits he doesn't know what needs to be done or what strategy will have to be adopted. All he knows is that the strategy should involve the American military whose capability will require time to be “reconstituted.” After that, we'll see what else ... as long as what comes next is meant to benefit Israel.

Well, James Lyons may not know what's good for America but the neocons and the Israelis believe they know what's good for them. They need people like him to help them take control of the American military, and do to the Levant what they did to Palestine. In case he doesn't know what that is, it's an offer to inflict on the Levant a West Bank style coexistence or exile or the peace of the grave. A peaceful liberal democracy that is!