Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
14. More on what Saudi and neocon influence has bought: ISIS
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 12:07 PM
Jan 2016

http://harpers.org/archive/2016/01/a-special-relationship/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43724.htm
(Repost)
A Special Relationship
The United States Is Teaming Up With Al Qaeda, Again

By Andrew Cockburn

December 14, 2015 "Information Clearing House" - "Harpers" -

( . . .)

By the beginning of 2012, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and the United States were all heavily involved in supporting the armed rebellion against Assad. In theory, American support for the Free Syrian Army was limited to “nonlethal supplies” from both the State Department and the CIA. Qatar, which had successfully packed the opposition Syrian National Council with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, operated under no such restrictions. A stream of loaded Qatari transport planes took off from Al Udeid and headed to Turkey, whence their lethal cargo was moved into Syria.

“The Qataris were not at all discriminating in who they gave arms to,” the former White House official told me. “They were just dumping stuff to lucky recipients.” Chief among the lucky ones were Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham, both of which had benefited from a rebranding strategy instituted by Osama bin Laden. The year before he was killed, bin Laden had complained about the damage that offshoots such as Al Qaeda in Iraq, with its taste for beheadings and similar atrocities, had done to his organization’s image. He directed his media staff to prepare a new strategy that would avoid “everything that would have a negative impact on the perception” of Al Qaeda. Among the rebranding proposals discussed at his Abbottabad compound was the simple expedient of changing the organization’s name. This strategy was gradually implemented for the group’s newer offshoots, allowing Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham to present themselves to the credulous as kinder, gentler Islamists.

The rebranding program was paradoxically assisted by the rise of the Islamic State, a group that had split off from the Al Qaeda organization partly in disagreement over the image-softening exercise enjoined by Zawahiri. Although the Islamic State attracted many defectors and gained territory at the expense of its former Nusra partners, its assiduously cultivated reputation for extreme cruelty made the other groups look humane by comparison. (According to Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, many Nusra members suspect that the Islamic State was created by the Americans “to discredit jihad.”)

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, driven principally by its virulent enmity toward Iran, Assad’s main supporter, was eager to throw its weight behind the anti-Assad crusade. By December 2012, the CIA was arranging for large quantities of weapons, paid for by the Saudis, to move from Croatia to Jordan to Syria.

“The Saudis preferred to work through us,” explained the former White House official. “They didn’t have an autonomous capability to find weapons. We were the intermediaries, with some control over the distribution. There was an implicit illusion on the part of the U.S. that Saudi weapons were going to groups with some potential for a pro-Western attitude.” This was a curious illusion to entertain, given Saudi Arabia’s grim culture of Wahhabi austerity as well as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s flat declaration, in a classified cable from 2009, that “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.”

Some in intelligence circles suspect that such funding is ongoing. “How much Saudi and Qatari money — and I’m not suggesting direct government funding, but I am suggesting maybe a blind eye being turned — is being channeled towards ISIS and reaching it?” Dearlove asked in July 2014. “For ISIS to be able to surge into the Sunni areas of Iraq in the way that it’s done recently has to be the consequence of substantial and sustained funding. Such things simply do not happen spontaneously.” Those on the receiving end of Islamic State attacks tend to agree. Asked what could be done to help Iraq following the group’s lightning assaults in the summer of 2014, an Iraqi diplomat replied: “Bomb Saudi Arabia.”



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

They rule by proxy vote through the corporations and politicians they purchased leveymg Jan 2016 #1
The Saudi-Israeli relationship always struck me as really weird but this article Fast Walker 52 Jan 2016 #4
Did you link to the wrong article? It doesn't mention Israel once muriel_volestrangler Jan 2016 #8
The Israeli role in US politics is well known. Here's more about the Saudis and the Clintons (NYT): leveymg Jan 2016 #9
Nothing there about Israel either. You appear to be putting forward an evidence-free conspiracy muriel_volestrangler Jan 2016 #10
Here's more on the burgeoning Saudi-Israeli alliance to sway US policy leveymg Jan 2016 #11
Anything else from Muriel about that? Crickets. leveymg Jan 2016 #12
More on what Saudi and neocon influence has bought: ISIS leveymg Jan 2016 #14
If you want someone to reply to you, then you ought to reply to them muriel_volestrangler Jan 2016 #17
I originally posted in response to you. Established the nexus between Israel and KSA "diplomacy" leveymg Jan 2016 #18
Your 'crickets' reply was in reply to a reply you wrote to yourself. muriel_volestrangler Jan 2016 #19
Didn't mean to shut you out. leveymg Jan 2016 #20
I was responding to leveymg's comment, since they brought up Israel Fast Walker 52 Jan 2016 #15
+1 to that. nt raouldukelives Jan 2016 #5
. haikugal Jan 2016 #2
.... Scuba Jan 2016 #3
exactly. Fast Walker 52 Jan 2016 #6
Not as incestuous as the Bush and al-Saud clans, but it's bi-partisan. Unfortunately. leveymg Jan 2016 #13
You should post this to good reads. It will last longer on the front page betterdemsonly Jan 2016 #7
Thanks-- good idea Fast Walker 52 Jan 2016 #16
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Historic New Harpers Arti...»Reply #14