Bombing Syria a ‘win-win’ for Obama
Nevertheless, despite the success of staging an attack on zero evidence, Escobar believes Obama will have a tough time at the upcoming G20 summit in St. Petersburg when he is surrounded by 18 leaders who disagree with him, David Cameron notwithstanding.
RT:There has been a lot of world reaction from people against intervention. Obama yesterday said that he had made no final decision, so why is he suddenly going ahead?
Pepe Escobar: It’s his Hail Mary pass. He is thinking in terms of Congress and in terms of public opinion in the US. You can say this is a win-win situation: the senate is a slam dunk – he’s going to win. Congress is more complicated, it’s dominated by Republicans. If they say yes, he’ll go ahead – and become “Nobel Prize Winner – former President Obama.” If Congress says no, he can always say, “Look, I tried, but they don’t want me to bomb anybody.” I don’t think the US Congress will refuse the opportunity to once again bomb a Middle Eastern country. But this is Obama’s role. He looked today at what happened to Cameron in England and said, “OK, I need a Hail Mary pass.” That’s it.
RT:He says it is going to be a limited action, not a full-scale war. What impact would a military strike by the US have on the situation in Syria?
PE: Well, this is the question I would say 6 billion people are asking at the moment – “What for?” So, It’s not regime change, it’s not going to degrade the regime’s capabilities. It’ not going to alter the situation, which is, that Assad’s army has been gaining battles and advances for the past two months at least. So this is just to send the message that “I – the president of the United States – said this is a red line, and it was crossed,” and then the evidence, of course. Then the UN inspectors. Then the UN Security Council. Then NATO. Then even the mini-coalition of the willing with [the French government]… this is completely absurd.
RT:Some could say though Obama is acting as a moral policeman on behalf of the rest of the world, who are appalled that this chemical attack took place. They are convinced that it came from the Assad regime. He therefore has to be punished, doesn’t he?
PE: The evidence that they have was offered essentially by Benny Gantz – the chief of the Israeli Defense Force – directly to Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It was intel, basically, by Mossad. It can be extremely compromised. On top of this, we have a triple agenda here: the Obama administration, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Bandar “Bush” [Bandar bin Sultan – RT] is in charge of the Syrian war since he became director of national intelligence in Saudi Arabia. There is a direct connection between Bandar “Bush” and these hardcore Wahhabis, Sunni radicals – whatever you want to call them, Jabhat al Nusra, Al-Qaida in Iraq, Salafi Jihadists… you name it – they’re all linked to Bandar. There is a connection between jihadi cells that were busted in Iraq last month and one of these guys in an interrogation said that Jabhat al Nusra in Syria are going to get our chemical weapons, our rudimentary chemical weapons, so there’s a very strong possibility which must be analyzed by the UN inspectors that this was probably a false flag.
RT:Nevertheless, a military strike is imminent by the sound of things. The reaction from Russia and Iran… what sort of international impact could this have?
PE: I would love to be in the same room when Barack Obama meets President Vladimir Putin in St. Petersburg next week. We’re not going to have a face-to-face between Presidents Putin and Obama, but we’re going to have leaders from Brazil, India, China – not to mention other developing countries, which are extremely reticent vis-à-vis this new American bombing of a Middle Eastern country, that’s what it is. So the G20 is completely derailed by now. The only thing they’re going to be discussing is Syria. And Obama is going to be there, completely isolated against the other 19 leaders… or 18 – because Cameron is going to be there, right?