|Brookings Institution’s, Middle East Memo #21
“Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf),”
states the humanitarian “responsibility to protect”
is but a pretext for long-planned regime change.
Tony Cartalucci, Contributor
Brookings’ “Middle East Memo #21” quoted almost verbatim as US begins ‘plan B’ for regime change in Syria.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today regarding the ongoing violence in Syria:
We have to work closely with the opposition, because more and more territory is being taken and it will eventually result in a safe haven inside Syria that will then provide a base for further actions by the opposition. –Reuters, July 24, 2012
An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under Annan’s leadership.This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts. –page 4, Assessing Options for Regime Change (.pdf), Brookings Institution, March 2012.
Quite clearly the Syrian government is not teetering as the West has claimed.
But aside from the United States’ belligerent and floundering foreign policy being dictated by unelected policy wonks, funded by the corporate-financier interests of Wall Street and London, Clinton’s parroting of Brookings’ report indicates that Syria’s current crisis is about to be compounded, not resolved, and as a direct result of further Western meddling.
Image: Some of the corporate sponsors behind the Brookings Institution, from whose playbook US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is reading. (click image to enlarge)
The United States might still arm the opposition even knowing they will probably never have sufficient power, on their own, to dislodge the Asad network. Washington might choose to do so simply in the belief that at least providing an oppressed people with some ability to resist their oppressors is better than doing nothing at all, even if the support provided has little chance of turning defeat into victory. Alternatively, the United States might calculate that it is still worthwhile to pin down the Asad regime and bleed it, keeping a regional adversary weak, while avoiding the costs of direct intervention. –pages 8-9, Assessing Options for Regime Change, Brookings Institution.
Readers are encouraged to read the entire Brookings report (.pdf) so as to better understand events unfolding in Syria and how they are driven not by “democracy promotion,” but by long-planned regime-change being executed by and for the corporate-financier interests of the Fortune 500. Readers are also encouraged to identify, expose, boycott, and replace the corporate-financier interests using the people of the West to subjugate the people of the East, for their own interests and aspirations toward global hegemony.
Other reports covering Brookings “Middle East Memo #21:”
Brookings Announces Next Move in Syria: War
US Brookings Wants to “Bleed” Syria to Death
US to Russia: Give Up or Swim in Our Sea of Syrian Blood
Syrian Peace Deal: UN’s Cloak to NATO’s Dagger
You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE