Kourosh Ziabari: Vietnam War veteran and renowned peace activist S. Brian Willson believes that the Arab states of the Persian Gulf are destabilizing Syria by sending arms and ammunitions to the rebels and Al-Qaeda fighters operating in the Arab country simply in order to gratify the United States and make sure that they will be never destabilized politically.
“Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia either have US military bases or possess strategic resources desired by the US and the West. Perhaps many of the Arab nations want to be sufficiently supportive of the US and its desire to finish off Syria as the US did recently to Libya so as not to be so vulnerable themselves to being destabilized by the US,” said Brian Willson.
Willson served in the U.S. Air Force from 1966 to 1970. He left the Air Force as a Captain. He is a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War and Veterans For Peace. As an attorney and writer, he has traveled to several countries across the world including Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Haiti, Iraq, the Palestinian Territories, Japan, North Korea and South Korea.
His first book, which was an autobiography titled “On Third World Legs” was published in 1992.
To discuss the ongoing conflict in Syria and the situation of the crisis-hit country aggravated by the presence of the multinational terrorists and Al-Qaeda combatants, I conducted an interview with Mr. Willson. What follows is the text of the interview.
Q: What do you think is the U.S. policy for the future of Syria? Is Washington trying to maintain the current crisis and instability in Syria in order to disintegrate the central government and realize its plans for Balkanizing Syria?
A: The US would love to destroy Syria along with Iran, both considered remaining holdouts in the Middle East who do not “cry uncle” and who interfere with the free play and movement of pipelines carrying geo-strategic fossil fuels. Any country desiring to preserve its autonomy and self-determination from encroaching and demanding Western markets and values is perceived as a threat to US/Western hegemony.
Q: What’s your viewpoint on the U.S. mass media’s coverage of the crisis in Syria? The unchanging theme which can be found in their reports is that the government of President Assad is killing his own citizens, has restricted social freedoms and is not willing to take part in negotiations with the opposition; however, they never talk of the U.S. sponsorship of the rebels and Al-Qaeda fighters.
A: The US mass media is merely an indispensable arm of the US corporatocracy – a modern version of fascism. The mass media itself is a corporation in the business of making profits by assuring that its readers, viewers, and listeners become purchasers of the ideology and materialism of its advertisers.
Q: Why have some Arab allies of the United States in the Middle East joined the forces fighting the government of President Assad? Syria is an Arab country, and the Arab nations usually don’t betray each other. Why has the Arab League suspended the membership of Syria and such countries as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are taking part in the efforts aimed at sabotaging the security of Syria?
A: I do not feel sufficiently competent to answer this. Former General Wesley Clark has stated there is an old Dept of Defense (War) memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran., Bahrain, Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia either have US military bases or possess strategic resources desired by the US and the West. Perhaps many of the Arab nations want to be sufficiently supportive of the US and its desire to finish off Syria as the US did recently to Libya so as not to be so vulnerable themselves to being destabilized by the US.
Q:The Human Rights Watch has accused the Syrian armed rebels of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Only in August, 190 civilians were killed by the armed opposition forces in the Lattakia province. Why don’t the international organizations take action to prevent these war crimes from happening and condemn the extremist rebels?
A: International human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International for example, are very western biased and are protective of their political credibility and funding base. They rarely take on the grotesque human rights abuses that are pervasive in the US. They utilize double standards that are typical with western values and arrogance vis-à-vis the “other” world.
Q: What do you think about the U.S. double standards on the issue of terrorism? It opposes terrorism when its interests are jeopardized, and supports terrorism when it deems necessary. It’s exactly doing the same in Syria. It’s supporting the rebels and Al-Qaeda terrorists, because they fight the government of President Assad, one of the main adversaries of the United States in the region. How is possible to justify this dual-track policy?
A: The US is the sole wholesale terrorist force in the world. All other “terrorist” actors are retail versions in desperate response to the egregious force imposed upon them by the US and West. The US is waging a “war of terror” on the world, and most people in the US and the West in general, are so blinded by self-righteous bias that they cannot see it, or choose to deny the reality. The US possesses but 4.6% of the world’s population, yet insatiably consumes from 25% to a third of the world’s resources. This is huge structural problem, economically and politically, as well as psychologically. We are addicted to materialism and have outsourced the consequential pain and suffering that undermines our “prosperity” for so long that we cannot recognize and certainly do not want to recognize our historical denial of this reality.
Q: What’s your prediction for the future of conflict and violence in Syria? Is the international community determined enough to bring the crisis to an end in a peaceful and diplomatic manner? In this path, are you optimistic about the Geneva 2 conference?
A: I am not a good prophet. I do believe that the history of US imperialism is just about finished, but cornered animals are dangerous in their desperate efforts to survive one last threat to their power. The fact that the US chose so far not to bomb Syria is a huge shift in loss of US power. I think it is possible that a Geneva II Conference may occur in the near future now that Syria has agreed to ban itself of chemical weapons (despite the US, Israel and many other nations retaining their chemical, and nuclear weapons) and is holding secret talks with some of the opposition forces. Assad may in fact voluntarily step aside in this process even if he survives.