ISIL, A Geopolitical Multifunction Tool for Western Interests in Region
"The terrorist group which calls itself today 'Islamic State' (IS) would not exist without the foreign support for the so-called 'rebel groups' in Syria by the West, Turkey and the (Persian) Gulf monarchies. This is a matter of fact, nobody can seriously doubt that. I think there is no real disagreement about that. Even many of those who support the western line admit today that it was a 'mistake' to arm and to train fanatics in camps in Jordan and Turkey to overthrow the Syrian government. The point is: I do not believe it was a 'mistake'. I think the West created this monster on purpose, a type of a 'geopolitical bulldozer' and 'bogeyman' – a group which 'cleans up' the region and which can be easily targeted as well if they turn to the wrong direction. The IS is a type of a geopolitical multifunction tool for the western interests in the region," Ochsenreiter said in an exclusive interview with Fars News Agency.
Manuel Ochsenreiter, born in 1976 in South Germany, is Editor-in-Chief of German monthly newsmagazine ZUERST!, part investigative journalist, and part reporter. He writes on politics, German and European foreign policy and Middle East affairs. Ochsenreiter reports especially about geopolitical topics in various European media. He visited several times Syria during the last three years and reported about the war of the Syrian Arab Army against the Western backed terrorism. Ochsenreiter's articles and interviews are criticized blisteringly by German mainstream media because they oppose the established news coverage. He researches as well about the influence of foreign NGOs and lobby organizations in Germany and about the work of German NGOs and foundations in foreign countries.
What follows is the full text of the interview:
Q: Many analysts believe that the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is the product of the US polices in the Middle East. What's your take on that? Do you believe that the US and its allies have directly contributed to the creation of the ISIL?
A: The terrorist group which calls itself today “Islamic State” (IS) would not exist without the foreign support for so called "rebel groups” in Syria by the West, Turkey and the (Persian) Gulf monarchies. This is a matter of fact, nobody can seriously doubt that. I think there is no real disagreement about that. Even many of those who support the western line admit today that it was a “mistake” to arm and to train fanatics in camps in Jordan and Turkey to overthrow the Syrian government. The point is: I do not believe it was a “mistake”. I think the West created this monster on purpose, a type of a “geopolitical bulldozer” and “bogeyman” – a group which “cleans up” the region and which can be easily targeted as well if they turn to the wrong direction. The IS is a type of a geopolitical multifunction tool for the Western interests in the region.
Q: As you know NATO heads of state convened in the Welsh city of Newport on 4-5 September and US Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told foreign and defense ministers participating in the NATO summit that the US was forming a broad international coalition against ISIL. Ministers from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Canada, Australia, Turkey, Italy, Poland and Denmark met in Wales to hammer out a strategy for battling ISIL, but the policy was questioned by many regional officials and political leaders. After the so-called US-led coalition against the ISIL declared its creation, scores of experts and a number of countries lashed out at the western states for pursuing a double-standard policy towards campaign against terrorism in various countries. What's your perspective on that?
A: Well, we could say western tax payer's money is now used to fight western tax payer's money. Of course the whole “anti-terror coalition” is a type of a cynical joke. Since 2011 the West sponsors so called “moderate rebels” in Syria. Germany even hosted in 2012 a secret conference of the so-called “opposition groups” including the radical Muslim brotherhood organization in Berlin – the “Day After-Project”. It was funded by the U.S. State Department, the Swiss Foreign Ministry, a Dutch NGO “Hivos”, and a Norwegian NGO “Noref”. The German Foreign Ministry supported the project additionally. The narrative was always: “The moderate groups are okay, we have to help them so that the radicals do not have a chance”. But that had back then nothing to do with reality. When I was in Syria in 2012 there were no “moderate rebels”. The so-called “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) was full of radicals; in Damascus there was an FSA-brigade called “Osama bin Laden”. Countless fanatics from all over the world were already infiltrating Syria and committing horrible war crimes against civilians and soldiers of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) while the so-called “opposition” was debating in the German capital. In July 2012 the “rebels” were attacking Damascus – “Operation Damascus Volcano” – and some terrorist groups managed to infiltrate the city. I was with the SAA in the quarter of Midan in Damascus during those days. I saw dead terrorists from Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Arab countries; the graffiti paroles on the walls in Midan showed just radical and hateful sectarian insults against Alawites, Christians and Shiites. Mass executions, beheadings and the pulverization of the whole settlements were the daily “work” of “moderate rebel groups” from the beginning. Of course the question is absolutely justified why now all those countries that used to sponsor, train and arm those terrorist groups – especially the US and the EU – play now the schoolmasters in the anti-terror-warfare. The actions of this “war against IS” are also deeply questionable. It is already clear that the US strikes hit the Syrian infrastructure while the terrorists of the IS are still able to move. Now the Pentagon stated that air strikes won't be enough against the IS terrorists. It needs ordinary infantry to fight IS. By the way, there is already infantry going on war against the terrorists – the SAA and Hezbullah forces. But Washington wants to arm, train and finance again “moderate rebels” – this time against the IS. Maybe we witness right now the birth of the next horrible terrorist group, more ruthless and brutal than IS.
Q: As you know a number of international rights groups, including Amnesty International, have accused the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) terrorist group of carrying out war crimes in Iraq that includes mass killings, abductions and sexual violence.
The United Nations' top human rights body approved a request by Iraq to open an investigation into crimes committed by the ISIL terrorists against civilians. So far no serious measures have been taken to stop these war criminals. Many law experts maintain that an international fact-finding commission ought to be formed in order to prosecute the backers of the ISIL under international law. What do you think?
A: The war against terrorism in Syria and Iraq is not a mission impossible at all. It needs just the political will. The terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq could be harmed in an effective way by stopping all support. That would mean: Turkey would have to close the borders immediately and to arrest all terrorists on Turkish territory before they can enter Syria or Iraq. Ankara would have also to stop immediately the business with stolen Syrian and Iraqi goods on its territory. Saudi Arabia and the other (Persian) Gulf countries would have to detain all those “businessmen” who donate money to those terrorist groups. The West would have to stop immediately any support for the so-called “armed opposition” in Syria. At the same time the sanctions against Syria should be lifted so that the state can recover and fight more effectively against terrorist groups. And of course: The backers of terrorism should be detained and prosecuted. All these measures are very reasonable. That the West does not push for these measures, but instead bombs Syria simply shows neither Washington nor Brussels have the political will to stop terrorism.
Q: As far as I know you have been reporting from the Syrian battlefields for ZUERST since 2011. Would you please be kind enough to share your personal experiences with us on your long-time presence in the war-torn country?
A: Since the beginning of that horrible and destructive war I have been several times in Syria. It was from the early beginning a geopolitical conflict and not a “popular uprising”. It is a typical proxy war and not a “civil war”. I spoke with so many Syrians – many of them far from being what the West calls “regime supporters” – and they were absolutely against the so-called “armed opposition”. I remember an impressive story a friend of mine from Damascus told me. He wanted to participate at a demonstration for political reforms in Syria in early 2011. When he arrived at the protest he was deeply shocked. There were only radicalized Sunni protesters shouting anti-Christian and anti-Alawi paroles. He is a Christian himself. That was his shortest trip to the “popular uprising”. Almost everybody I know in Syria mourns today the loss of relatives and friends. Kidnappings, sectarian killings, shelling and sniper fire are common in many areas in Syria since more than three years. I spoke with victims of kidnappings and wounded soldiers of the SAA. I visited destroyed churches and spoke to those brave priests who resist the sectarian terror. In Aleppo I visited the refugee camp in the university campus with tens of thousands civilians expelled by the terrorist violence. It is a slow genocide in Syria with the helping hand of the West. And it will not end until the foreign support for the terrorist groups stops.
Source: Farsnews
