‘Convenient’: Cameron using ISIS atrocities to beat Mid-East war drum
Another outrageous demonstration of the ISIS brutality took place on 13th September, when the IS issued a video of the beheading of UK aid worker David Haines. The masked man in the video claimed that Haines was killed because of Cameron’s pledge to arm Kurdish forces so as to battle the jihadist group. Cameron, in turn, called the crime “an act of pure evil” and promised to “hunt down these murderers and ensure they face justice”.
According to journalist Afshin Rattansi, there is an irony in the beheading video, as it begins with the image of Cameron talking to reporters about the necessity to support the moderate Syrian opposition, who turned out to have made a deal with ISIS.
“In fact, Cameron has been supporting groups allied to ISIS for a long time now and when the Foreign Office tries to scramble to find confirmation about what seems to have happened, how ironic that it was the Foreign Office that has been backing ISIS all the time,” Rattansi told RT.
Both Cameron and US President Barack Obama simultaneously said they would not work with Syrian President Bashar Assad against the ISIS elements, Rattansi, an RT contributor, said. At the same time, Islamic State gets backing from the UK and US allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
“The video came out at a convenient time for Mr. Cameron, who is trying to persuade an unwilling public in Britain that it should again get involved in conflict in the Middle East,” Rattansi said.
“A genuflecting media in this country does what the government says, but this video is already telling the greater British public that somehow Britain’s reluctance to bomb Syria helped to create ISIS, when of course Cameron is bombing Syria to help ISIS,” Rattansi said.
According to the journalist, there is no information on how many UK hostages are still held by ISIS because “the Foreign Office, who has been supporting ISIS, won’t tell us and won’t tell the public.”
Jeff Steinberg, senior editor of magazine Executive Intelligence Review, is sure that there is a certain lack of confidence that there is public support for strategy on ISIS from among both the British and the American public.
“I think there is a lot of political calculations why Cameron is sort of pushing Obama to take the lead without any real support,” said Steinberg.
Steinberg believes that there are two reasons for that: “#1 is that some of the smarter British military commanders realize that there are fatal flaws in the strategy that was announced on Wednesday night by President Obama. And #2: David Cameron remembers very well that a year ago the British parliament rejected his request to support the US in a bombing campaign against the Syrian government which ultimately led to President Obama concluding that he had no public support either.”
Also, he went on, “Cameron knows that he has got a very difficult independence [vote] coming up in Scotland on Thursday.”
“There is a lot of political calibration in this, and of course Cameron himself is facing elections next spring. So domestic politics is a factor that cannot be ignored. But major British commanders, such as former head of the British armed forces, Lord Dannatt, have warned that the whole approach that President Obama has been laying out is not a winning strategy and therefore why getting involved in another major military campaign that has a very low probability of success,” Steinberg said.
There are a lot of serious economic and social problems in the US and in Europe that the Obama administration “continues to try to sweep under the rock,” Steinberg said.
When Obama laid out “at least the barebones outlines of his plan for waging war against the Islamic State, he could not help himself but have to basically make outlandish claims that the US economy is growing and expanding... People heard him say that, and they scratched their heads and said: ‘What world is this guy living in?’ He undermined his own effectiveness,” Steinberg told RT.
According to the expert, 1,000 Turks crossed the border into Iraq and Syria just in the last six weeks to join the Islamic State jihadists.
“And in many instances, this is not hardcore jihadists who are going there to die.They are going there because it is the best opportunity to get a decent paycheck. And they are willing to run that risk, because their families are poor and this is an opportunity to get a fairly lucrative amount of money for fighting for ISIL,” he added.
According to Steinberg, the BRICS nations – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – are making major economic advances, facing big infrastructure challenges, are doing job creation, and have real optimism about the economic future of that part of the world. But in Europe and in the United States it’s all downhill, he said. So that is going to continue to be a factor feeding the opportunities for these radical elements to recruit.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.