| 
 Al-Jazeerah History
 
 Archives
 
 Mission & Name
 
 Conflict Terminology
 
 Editorials
 
 Gaza Holocaust
 
 Gulf War
 
 Isdood
 
 Islam
 
 News
 
 News Photos
 
 Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials
 
 US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)
 
 www.aljazeerah.info
 
	  
           |  | 
 Israeli-Controlled Canada: White Dominions, 
	  Brown Colonies  By Eric WalbergAl-Jazeerah, CCUN, December 17, 2012 
 
 The Canadian government has no foreign policy anymore, doing exactly as 
	it is told by its Israeli advisers
 
 France and Britain have begun to circle Syria like vultures (my apologies 
	to vultures, who politely wait for their prey to die). They plan to save 
	Syria from chemical bombs – a surreal replay of Suez 1956, where France and 
	Britain cooked up a pretext to invade Egypt with the US posing as the more 
	restrained gang member, not to mention Iraq 2003, when they reversed their 
	roles. 
 Meanwhile, Canada sings on demand for its US-Israeli 
	sponsors. The Canadian government solemnly announced this week it is ready 
	-- if asked by NATO -- to deploy the Canadian Joint Incident Response Unit, 
	which handles chemical, biological and radioactive attacks. Canada will also 
	send a Disaster Assistance Response Team to provide clean water in Syrians, 
	as well as engineers and staff who can help set up a field hospital. A 
	friendly navy frigate is already offshore.
 
 Once again Prime Minister 
	Stephen Harper plays his supporting role in the NATO-scripted drama 
	unfolding in the Middle East. He takes “the threat of chemical weapons in 
	Syria very seriously”, but demurs on whether Canada will send CF-18 fighter 
	jets over Syria, as it did in Libya to enforce a no-fly zone, or put combat 
	troops on the ground. He has not yet given the current opposition coalition, 
	the Syrian National Coalition (SNC), his blessing, although US Secretary of 
	State Hillary Clinton formally recognized the opposition at a Friends of 
	Syria summit in Morocco on Wednesday, joining the Euro crowd.
 
 The 
	Canadian government has no foreign policy anymore, doing exactly as it is 
	told by its Israeli advisers, so the reason for Harper’s coyness must be 
	found there. Israel itself is in a quandary about Syria.
 
 Israeli 
	policy during the past three decades has following the divide-and-conquer 
	Yinon Doctrine, playing various forces among its Arab neighbors against each 
	other -- Maronite and Orthodox Christian, Sunni and Shia Muslim, Druze, etc 
	-- in order to keep the Middle East weak and unstable.
 
 In Syria, 
	that even meant quietly supporting the Muslim Brotherhood during its 
	ill-fated uprising in 1981, not because Israel wanted an Islamist Syria, but 
	to keep the Syrian government off-balance. The secular and nationalist 
	Baathist regime, together with Egypt, fought a war with Israel in 1967. 
	These secular governments were the big threat, and it was only natural to 
	try and cripple the regimes of Egypt and Syria, even if that meant working 
	with Islamists.
 
 Today, the West is eagerly arming the SNC, where 
	Islamists predominate, even as Israel and Canada dawdle. How can this be?
 
 The explanation is simple. As Kissinger said of Iraq and Iran during 
	their war in the 1980s, “A pity they both can’t lose.” Or Truman when the 
	Germans invaded Russia 22 June 1941: “If we see that Germany is winning we 
	ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and 
	that way let them kill as many as possible.” Not only is Egypt now 
	rediscovering its Islamic, very anti-Zionist roots, making Egyptian 
	Islamists the main enemy, but there is no guarantee the SNC will defeat the 
	Syrian army, and unlike far away France, Britain and the US, Israel must 
	live chock-a-block with whoever is in Damascus -- and Cairo -- when the 
	mustard gas clears.
 
 Ha, ha. Only joking. What about the chemical 
	weapons threat? Syria is one of the few countries that has not signed the 
	1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). (Israel has signed but not ratified 
	it.) But Assad has made it clear he will not approve their use on civilians. 
	Saddam Hussein’s example is proof enough of the madness of that. The real 
	worry over WMDs is that whatever supplies the Syrian government has could 
	soon fall into the hands of the western-backed rebels, in particular, al-Nusrah 
	Front (aka, al-Qaeda in Iraq).
 
 However, who can blame Assad if he 
	drops a few on invading Brits, French, and yes Americans? It would be a 
	perfect way to ‘celebrate’ the centenary of WWI, where holier-than-thou 
	Germany, Britain and France pioneered their use, despite having signed the 
	Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 banning them. Britain used chlorine 
	against the Germans in 1915 but the wind blew back on the British trenches 
	-- a case of ‘friendly gas’. The US took their use to new heights in Vietnam 
	with Agent Orange. Only the one-time US ally Saddam Hussein was ever brought 
	to justice for using them. The US and Russia still have stockpiles (not to 
	mention nuclear and biological weapons), despite their obligation under the 
	CWC to destroy them all.
 
 The Syrians would get special satisfaction 
	from gassing the French, who carved up and invaded Syria in 1920. Syria was 
	promised France by Britain as its reward for the 1.7 million French who died 
	in the WWI bloodbath that killed 16 million (Britain lost ‘less than’ a 
	million). The only ‘positive’ outcome for the Allies was the destruction and 
	occupation of the Ottoman Caliphate and the creation of a Jewish state 
	there.
 
 This was an outrageous betrayal of the Arabs, who had 
	arguably tipped the balance in WWI -- at great loss -- in Britain’s favor, 
	on the promise of post-war independence. But, as the Spanish say, ‘You don’t 
	dance with the devil; he dances with you.” Britain wanted Iraq for its oil 
	and Palestine for a Jewish state, “the hill citadel of Jerusalem” according 
	to geopolitical theorist Halford Mackinder -- the last link in the British 
	empire. With a wink and a nod from Britain, France invaded Syria in 1920 and 
	crushed a heroic uprising in 1925--1927, killing thousands. Greater Syria 
	was divided into southern Turkey, French-occupied Lebanon/ Syria, and 
	British-occupied Jordan/ Palestine.
 
 It was not till 1946 that the 
	French were finally booted out -- kicking and screaming. Post-WWII Syrian 
	politics is a litany of coups, egged on by the US, until the army and 
	socialist Baathists finally settled on Hafiz al-Assad in 1971. Trying to 
	pick up the pieces after the brutal French occupation and living next door 
	to permanent nightmare Israel are not conducive to the charade of 
	western-style pluralism, so the subsequent harsh dictatorship of Assad I and 
	the new-improved Assad II are not surprising. The SNC alternative has no 
	prospects for ruling a united Syria. Syria’s future under the SNC is already 
	being played out in Iraq, though Assad is far more popular and sensible than 
	Saddam Hussein, and his demise will take down much of the Syria social order 
	with him.
 
 This is fine from an Israeli point of view as long as the 
	Islamists are kept busy fighting their coalition ‘allies’ within the SNC. 
	But if the Islamists dominate in the SNC, and if the power vacuum allows 
	al-Qaeda to take root (it already has), this could be a problem for Israel. 
	Look what happened to the Islamists in Gaza, where they surged and triumphed 
	in elections in 2006 and remain strong. Israel has only to look south to 
	Egypt to see how a revolutionary coalition can turn into an Islamic 
	government which is not nearly as pliable as the secular dictatorship it 
	replaced. This is what keeps many Israelis rooting for Assad.
 
 When 
	France was colonizing Syria a century ago, Canada was already the great 
	colonial success story as a ‘white dominion’, and was allowed to join the 
	ranks of the imperial rich, unlike Syria et al. (Lawrence ‘of Arabia’ 
	lobbied Churchill to create a united Arab British mandate as the first 
	‘brown dominion’, with no success.)
 
 As a former colony of both 
	France and Britain, the loyal ‘white dominion’ of 
	yesteryear, Canada may look like the perfect intermediary today: ‘Be 
	nice and you too can graduate from colony to dominion.’ However, the flip 
	side of white dominion status is that, like Israel or South Africa, you have
	built your society on the bones of the ‘brown’ 
	natives. So it is not surprising that this week, even as Harper was 
	toying with recognizing the SNC (who cares?), he faces ongoing protests over 
	government neglect of Canada’s First Nations.
 
 Attawapiskat Chief 
	Theresa Spence began a hunger strike in Ottawa charging the government with 
	“marginalizing our political leadership, along with the enforced segregation 
	of our people so that our rich heritage can be wiped out and the great 
	bounty contained in our traditional lands be made available for exploitation 
	by large multi-national companies.” But Canada’s First Nations -- what’s 
	left of them -- can thank their lucky stars they weren’t born in the ‘brown 
	colonies’ of the Middle East.
 *** Eric Walberg is author of Postmodern 
	Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games
	http://claritypress.com/Walberg.html 
	You can reach him at http://ericwalberg.com/
 
 
 
 |  |  |