A Response to Henry Kissinger on Syria and the Global Order by Christof Lehmann.
By Dr. Christof Lehmann. Dr. Kissinger. This article is an open response to your recent article on principles in international law, the Treaty of Westphalia, the Arab Spring, and questions about military intervention into the internal affairs of sovereign nations based on humanitarian principles. (1)
In your article you write that “the Arab Spring is generally discussed in terms of the prospects for democracy” and you continue by stating “equally significant is the increasing appeal – most recently in Syria – of outside intervention to bring about regime change, overturning prevalent notions of international order“.(ibid.)
You then continue by constructing an argument for, that the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia (2) do not fully apply for nation states within the Middle East because of their lack of historical existence, but let us stay with your initial statements first, that “The Arab Spring is generally discussed in terms of the prospects for democracy“.
The Manufacturing of a context for the use of “the responsibility to protect”.
I believe that it can not have escaped you, that the phenomena that is euphemistically called “The Arab Spring” has been selectively emphasized by Western Political Players and Western Main Stream Media, in nations that had or have an ambivalent or unsympathetic position towards regional interests of European Union member states and the United States of America. Interestingly the popular demands for political change are exclusively finding support by Western nations, in countries where a regime change could bring about political and geo-political advantages. On the other hand, the legitimate demands for political, social and legal reforms in Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E., Qatar, Jordan, violent military crack-downs like in Bahrain, and wide-spread human rights abuses are neglected. The fact that Saudi Arabia is beheading women for “sorcery” is hardly worth mentioning. (3) I will return to this point when looking at the part of your article where you relate to problems in “allied countries“.
I find it also unbelievable that it should have escaped you that the Arab Spring has been a long-planned, meticulously executed operation by NATO member states with the purpose to bring about regime change in Libya, Syria, Iran.
In my article “Arabian Summer or NATO´s Fall from August 2011 I informed about an officer of the US Special Forces who turned whistle-blower, and reported that US Special Forces at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina had been actively training and preparing for a war on Libya, Syria, Iran and Hezbollah. Further more, that US Special Forces had been training with foreign fighters, and that the USA already in August had Special Forces operating in Syria.(4)
In another article by Martin Iqbal, he is drawing attention to the fact that I have provided information via a Palestinian Intelligence Source in Turkey, that has provided evidence for the fact that the Arab Spring, including a covert war on Syria by an alliance of NATO, Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas was being “implemented” since at least 2010, and that the shooting of nine Turks on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla vessel Marvi Marmara was a precursor for the war on Syria. (5)
The political uprisings of the people in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya were relatively small events that had been blown out of proportion and aggravated by a well planned and executed media campaign. The fact that Al Jazeera has “produced” images of violence can not have escaped you, and if it has I would not advise making use of you as political adviser. One of the best examples of the complicity of co-opted media is the false “Tripoli Green Square” with celebrating Libyan “rebels” that was filmed in Qatar. (6) Need I say more ?
To describe the Arab Spring in terms of popular demands for democracy is at best misinformation. The victims in Egypt are those who now see how their “revolution” has been and is being co-opted. The victims in Libya are the entire people of Libya. Dr. Kissinger, I find it appalling that you implicitly mention Libya within the context of demands for democracy.
I find it unbelievable that it has escaped you, that the US-Administration, when it sent CIA operatives to Benghazi and Derna to contact the “rebels” and the “National Council” must have been fully aware of the fact that they would be contacting and co-operating with the Al-Qaeda associated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. A West Point Anti Terrorism Study clearly documents that the greatest per capita contributor to foreign Al-Qaeda fighters in Iraq was Libya, and that the vast majority of those Libyan Al-Qaeda fighters came from Benghazi and Derna. (7)
I find it unbelievable that it either has escaped you, or that you are omitting the fact that the commander of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Abdelhakim Belhadj, whom the USA and NATO endorsed as ally is the very person of whom former Spanish P.M. Aznar told that he was the man behind the Madrid Train bombings, unbelievable that you would not have known about the fact that the USA and NATO were arming and financing terrorists, supervising their murderous campaign with NATO special operations forces, while selling to the public a narrative of Libyan “rebels”. I have published an article on Abdelhakim Belhadj in 2011, I could make his register of war crimes and acts of terrorism more comprehensive today. (8) Today he is the military governor of Tripoli and taking part in elections in a Libya that found it necessary to pass a law that makes speaking positively about Ghadafi, his government, family or achievements for Libya punishable with life imprisonment. He is also, as it often is with agents of NATO Intelligence, a multi purpose man, and now commanding at least 18.000 NATO mercenaries ( Al-Qaeda ) that are murdering Syrians under the name of Free Syrian Army.
Turning to Syria, Dr. Kissinger, has it escaped you, that the majority of the known members of the National Council of Syria have ties to organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, and institutes and organizations where you are solidly “present”? If you have not noticed the fact you could read my article “The National Council of Syria and US Unconventional Warfare“. (9)
Dr. Kissinger, I find it absolutely appalling, that a man in your position, who is actively taking part in manufacturing murderous post-modern coup de etats, who is co-operating with known terrorists and terrorist organizations, who is advising others to do the same, is speaking about democracy and international law. Dr. Kissinger, according to international law, You are a war criminal of the most dangerous kind, and the words “international law and human rights” coming from your mouth are an outrage.
Has it escaped you, Dr. Kissinger, that Russian and Syrian intelligence services already late in 2011 knew, and informed the public about the fact that the Al-Qaeda Omar Brigade, an assassination, death squad and bomb-terror specialist brigade had been detached from Saudi Arabia to take part in the attempted subversion of the Syrian government ? Has it escaped you that the Omar Brigade is under the control of the Saudi Arabian Ministry of the Interior ?(10)
Has it escaped you, Dr. Kissinger, that the Training Circular TC 18-01, which the US Special Forces at Ft. Bragg provide for international terrorists whom they are training, sponsoring, supervising and unleashing against the people of Syria is a step by step manual for bringing about the very “emergency” which the USA, NATO, the Dictatorships of the GCC member states, and their proxy Syrians now use as a pretext to call for a military intervention against Syria. A military intervention under the guise of the “responsibility to protect” civilian populations. The very populations they are murdering with apparent impunity ? I have published TC 18-01 and invite you to study it. Any and all of the actions it is teaching are crimes according to international law, the Treaty of Westphalia included. You find a copy here: (11)
In your article, you are referring to the Treaty of Westphalia. The Treaty of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years War in Europe and which was established to distinguish domestic from foreign affairs in international diplomacy. It provided sovereignty to national states and provided a legal remedy against foreign interference into the internal affairs of sovereign nations as well as interventions. What you are forgetting to mention, Dr. Kissinger, is the fact that the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia also are enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. But rather than that you are applying a modo-colonialist perspective when you state that nation states who were colonies and whose borders were drawn by the occupying colonial power do not enjoy protection on historical grounds.
You are implicitly making the argument, that the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia are not fully applicable for many of the nations in the Middle East. You argue, that “only three of the region´s Muslim states had a historical basis: Turkey, Egypt and Iran. The borders of the others reflected a division of the spoils of the defunct Ottoman Empire among the victors of World War I, with minimal regard for ethnic and sectarian divisions .” You then continue stating, that “The diplomacy generated by the Arab Spring replaces Westphalian principles of equilibrium with a generalized doctrine of humanitarian intervention”.
Dr. Kissinger, either you have made a semantic mistake or your sentence includes a logical fallacy. It is not the diplomacy, that is trying to substitute Westphalian principles. As far as I am aware of Russia, China and the majority of peace-loving nations vehemently opposes that the Westphalian principles are violated with respect to Syria. It is, however a fact that NATO has signed a Secretariat Coordination Treaty with the UN, and that NATO has made violations of nations sovereignty based on humanitarian principles a part of it´s official doctrine – all the while it is creating the humanitarian crisis to create a pretext for invasion. See my article about the 25th NATO Summit in Chicago and the deconstruction of an article by Daalder and Stavridis. (12)
It is somewhat telling, Dr. Kissinger, that you are exclusively mentioning “Muslim” nations as not having a historical basis. I believe, Dr. Kissinger, that you are acutely aware of the fact that the state of Israel also has derived it´s apparent legitimization via the Balfour Declaration, the UN, and that the “historical argument” for the legitimacy of the state of Israel is so problematic that using it as precedence for nation building could potentially result in the most obscure claims for national independence. I am sure that you are acutely aware of it, but you could read my article Palestine Israel History and Theirstory. (13)
In my article “Palestine Israel History and Theirstory” (ibid.) I have argued and demonstrated that the “historical basis” for granting or respecting a nations rights and sovereignty is opening a Pandora´s box of problems that is impossible to close again. Making use of historical principles, Dr. Kissinger, how then about claiming Parts of Poland back for Germany, or what about the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation claiming major parts of Europe. The results of similar claims to sovereignty have resulted in the second world war and tens of millions of death.
However, what you are implicitly stating is, that The Syrian Arab Republic, for example, has no historical basis; that it is the “result of the victory of European Powers” and their arbitrary drawing of national borders. And naturally, Dr. Kissinger, such a creation that has owes it´s existence to the mercy of it´s former colonial masters does not deserve the protection of the principles of the Treaty of Westphalia or by implication of the principles that are enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, right ?
Dr. Kissinger, you have a wonderful ability to convey the most grotesque outrages and make them sound plausible – unless one really listens or reads and understands what outrages and crimes you are trying to market they are almost palatable. One of the sure recipes for becoming a Nobel Peace Laureate? Now let´s have a look at what you consider the problems that will follow along with an implementation of the “illegal” principle to intervene into sovereign states on the grounds of the “responsibility to protect”.
NATO and the principle of the “responsibility to protect”
First of all Dr. Kissinger you are writing “If adopted as a principle of foreign policy, this form of intervention raises broader questions for U.S. strategy“. That statements has several flaws. First, it is not a question “If” the principle will be adopted. It has been adopted already and preparations have been underway for years. Second, the question of legitimacy should have primate over the questions for U.S. strategy – but not of course if one is so used to the thinking along the lines of a war criminal as you are ?
Dr. Kissinger, listen for one moment to yourself and ask yourself the question how people in China, Russia, or in third world nations as you would call them are hearing you say “does America feel obliged to support every popular uprising against a non-democratic government“. You mean like the one in Bahrain ? Saudi Arabia ? But first back to NATO and the responsibility to protect.
In 2008 the UN and NATO signed a treaty that was kept out of the press as long as possible. The coordination of the UN and NAT secretariat transformed the UN into a de-facto instrument of US foreign policy and NATO into the official UN NATO military force. The NATO statements at the 25th NATO Summit in Chicago spoke a clear language.
The illegal abuse of UNSC resolution 1973-2011 on Libya, the illegal destruction of Libyan infrastructure, the illegal ousting of the Libyan government, the illegal special forces, the massacres on tens of thousands of black African migrant workers was described as a “teachable moment”. (ibid.) The use of cluster bombs in civilian populated areas like Brega, the use of Fuel-Air Bombs against civilians in Bani Walid, the thousands of murdered and maimed in Sirte were described as an air-campaign of unprecedented precision. The Libya campaign was described as model intervention for future interventions. Dr. Kissinger, the criminal adoption of the principle is not a question of IF, it has been adopted and is being ruthlessly implemented in Syria.
The question if the USA should feel obliged also to intervene in Saudi Arabia Dr. Kissinger; You know as well as anybody that the USA has plans to intervene when and where it perceives an advantage by doing so. Anything else is a question of fabricating the proper context and pretext, which you, I must say, are an expert at.
Dr. Kissinger, I spare you from de-constructing the rest of the article and in fairness I provided a link to it.
To be perfectly honest, it is not worth the time. With your article you have proven once again that you are one of the most dangerous war criminals, and that you are extremely skillful at spinning the facts and making your warmongering sound plausible and humane. Rather than de-constructing more of your words, I will rather spend my time and energy to see that people like you come behind bars where they belong. I encourage decent people to do the same.
The world does not need a Global Order based on NATO expansionism and imperialism under the guise of humanitarian principles. Regardless how skillful you are trying to make the criminal intent palatable.
Dr. Christof Lehmann