This is how Assad wins the Kurds away from the US (clip from RT)
by Vince Dhimos
Most Westerners have a conscience but it is usually controlled by the msm. Thus Westerners feel sorry for Syrians only if they are told that the Russians or Assad bombed them, but generally believe that there is no other way that Syrians could possibly get hurt. Although ISIS reportedly controlled 35% of Syria's territory in 2014, and although they were armed with the latest guns and rockets, the Western media have somehow convinced the majority of us that hardly any of the deaths resulting from the war were caused by these terrorists, who therefore must have been the most benign terrorists who ever lived. Saints no doubt. The rest of the hundreds of thousands of casualties, they poker-facedly swear, were caused by Assad’s troops. Even today, as terrorists shell parts of E. Ghouta, they continue to ply us with the same old story that Assad is somehow “deliberately targeting civilians,” but without ever explaining why on earth he would kill the people who will soon vote for him. Shouldn't he at least wait until after the elections?
These kindly Western news consumers are particularly concerned about the US-backed Kurds of the SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces). As long as they are loyal to the US government, they are deserving of our sympathy. But if they are loyal to Assad, they are somehow worse than terrorists. The msm merit a prize for persuasive journalism. None dare call it propaganda. And yet, an opinion poll of 2014 found that Assad was popular among Syrians despite the fact that at that time he was losing the war on terror, the US press was bombarding the world with anti-Assad propaganda and US pols were shrieking “Assad must go.” In 2015, a Figaro (French newspaper) poll showed Assad with 75% popularity in government-controlled zones (it is reasonable to assume that even fewer would prefer living under terror, so in those zones he would almost certainly poll just as high or higher). In 2016, another poll showed that 55% supported Assad. By 2017 the Western regime changers apparently gave up on trying to prove Assad’s unpopularity and we were unable to find poll results. One site, the staunchly pro-Western Foreign Policy, did admit, however, that he would probably be re-elected. So now the die-hard hawks are back to looking behind the bushes for chemical weapons to pin on him and are pretending that he is responsible for the casualties of terrorist shelling in E. Ghouta.
These same rabidly anti-Assad media are now working feverishly to make you feel sorry for the Kurds, whom the US is counting on to secure at least part of the Syrian pie – the part with the most oil reserves.
The SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces), a secular and largely Kurdish group, established by the Pentagon in Oct 2015 to use in its war against democratically elected President Assad, has been a leading ally of the US in Syria since relations with the mostly Sunni Muslim Arab opposition trying to overthrow Assad since 2011 proved to be violent jihadis and embarrassed the US regime, with some even joining ISIS or Al-Qaeda and using US-donated weapons in their fight not only against Assad but also against the US and allies. This is the predictable result when the US tries to use violent radicals to achieve its hidden agenda. Recall that one of the early experiments in allying with terrorists occurred in Afghanisten when US forces instigated regime change to bring down the Russians. This led to the creation of the Taliban and some believe this is how Osama got his start. Only Washington believes this will work, but not on the basis of reason but on the ideology of Neoconservatism, which rejects what can be called systematic morality. There is no right or wrong for these people, and in that they are at loggerheads with the average American. But they own the media, and hence the American mind.
In Syria, the US tried alliances with various terror groups, but each one proved to be an embarrassment for them, beheading their adversaries, eating human bodily organs, ie, doing the same distasteful things that we had come to associate with ISIS. They finally chose to team up with the Kurds under the guise of helping that group gain independence. But the Syrians could easily see through the ruse when the US dubbed these fighters the SDF and sent them to Deir Ezzor, far away from their native Kurdistan (Rojava in the Kurdish language). The Syrians knew the underlying reason for deploying them in Deir Ezzor province was the al-Omar oil field, the richest in Syria. Naturally, the US early built a base there to prevent the Syrians, the legitimate owners of the oil field, from encroaching on their booty. They blamed ISIS.
The Kurds should have known this was a dirty trick and not designed to help them gain independence. After all, as far back at the 1800s the US “helped” the Philippines win independence from Spain, but once that war was over, they immediately declared the country to be a territory of the US, much to the chagrin of the natives. That policy of “helping” under the guise of seizing possession of land has never died out and anyone who decides to become an “ally” of the US must by now realize that there are strings attached, including the possibility of losing one’s sovereignty. But the notion of independence is a powerful inventive that clouds concerns of self-preservation.
The Kurds now know why allying with the US was a mistake. For when the Turks invaded Syrian Kurdistan just across the Turkish border, the US simply abandoned the Kurds to their fate. Now many are dying thanks to their blind faith in the US. The official US position is that they cannot confront the Turks to save the Kurds because Turkey is a NATO member and “ally.” Some allies are more equal than others.
But there may be hope for the Kurds. They may have to abandon some of their plans for full independence, but if so, Assad and Putin will probably offer them terms they can live with, such as partial autonomy, in exchange for giving up the fight against Assad. As part of a compromise with Turkey, the YPG, a Kurdish group that Erdogan deems terrorists, would have to abandon their fight as well.
This kind of compromise is a far cry from the zero-sum game that the US plays, where one groups is deemed evil and another is “the good guys.”
This kind of equal treatment and respect for sovereignty that has become Russia’s trademark is the reason why the MENA (Middle East and North Africa) countries are coming to see Putin as an honest broker. The first they have ever seen in those parts.
He promises them something they’ve never seen before: a multipolar world.