The CIA's View of Syria
In the recent Front Line documentary, "The Dark Side," shown on PBS, Michael Scheuer explains the CIA view of Syria: This is what he said:
Syria is a perfect example. Syria, in my adult life, has always been tagged as an enemy of the United States and as a threat, but once you get inside the intelligence community, you find out that the Syrians are bankrupt, a police state that's riven with factions and couldn't threaten the United States in 100 years.Michael Scheuer was chief of the CIA's Bin Laden Desk from 1995 to 1999 and headed an internal CIA investigation into the allegations of a link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda -- an allegation his team found to be false. He is the author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror.
The whole part of the interview on Syria reads:
Question: At the moment of 9/11, give me a report card on the status of the CIA, vis-à-vis the new White House: their attitude, orientation, hopes, fears.
Michael Scheuer: There was a sort of euphoria that the Bush administration was going to be a strong backer of the CIA,... although it was clear that some members of that administration, particularly [then-Deputy Secretary of Defense] Mr. [Paul] Wolfowitz and [Secretary of Defense] Mr. [Donald] Rumsfeld, really had very little use for the intelligence community as a whole.
Question: Why, do you think?
Michael Scheuer: I think we weren't giving them the answers over the years that they wanted to hear. Syria is a perfect example. Syria, in my adult life, has always been tagged as an enemy of the United States and as a threat, but once you get inside the intelligence community, you find out that the Syrians are bankrupt, a police state that's riven with factions and couldn't threaten the United States in 100 years.
But because Rumsfeld and [then-Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas] Feith and Wolfowitz are so pro-Israeli, the answer needs to come back, "Yes, Syria is a threat." Over the course of a decade and longer, even back into the first Bush administration and into Mr. Reagan's administration, the enemies of Mr. Rumsfeld, Mr. Feith, Mr. Wolfowitz were not necessarily the enemies that you could derive from the intelligence material.
posted by Joshua Landis @ 6/24/2006 01:25:00 PM
15 comments
links to this post
15 Comments:
From Philip I (viarecta.blogspot.com)
Michael Scheuer is 100% correct. The Syrian regime has never posed a real threat to the US. That is one reason why the Israeli lobby has not been able to persuade the Bush Administration to commit to a policy of regime change. The Administration simply wants the regime to have no claws.
Interestingly, soon after Boy Assad was comically installed, the Israeli lobby stopped pushing for a regime change. Present-day Syria could not be more wonderful. Utterly incompetent, corrupt, rudderless, toothless and, above all, useful in keeping the Islamists at bay.
Always interesting to note the differences between actual Israeli points of view and those American points of view typically identified as "pro-Israeli".
Goerge if you are referring to the fact that Israel interest is in keeping the regime as is, I could not agree more.
The conspiracist in me has a nagging feeling that the second life accorded to Dr Assad was given partly as a result of the advise of the Israeli government who explained to Bush the eastern wisdom of "Khara Bta3rfo ..."
I recommend that your readers see the whole of the PBS Frontline broadcast called The Dark Side. You will find it at:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/1.html?&c=2rp
I think it is perhaps the most important documentary on how we got into the mess in the Middle East.
Johnbennett is absolutely right. "The Dark Side" is a must see for people, of any ideology, who are interested in understanding the real dynamic that led to the Iraq war.
I believe that the dozens of interviewsand the hundreds of sound bites make it as clear as it can be that this war was not about WMD, it was not about oil and it was not about restoring democracy to the Iraqi people. The only motivation was the Neo conservatives firm belief that 9/11 has offered an unprecedented opportunity for the US to rid itself of those that do not share its view of the world. It is these same individuals who shared a belief in the "rightous empire" i.e. the war on Iraq was not for territory or treasure in the old sense of empire but it was based and guided by the principal that it is the moral duty and obligation of the US to establish a world in its image . By doing so , it will be costly for the US , but it will create a world that is harmonious and homogenous, a world that is guided by the principles of free enterprise and political democracy. The major actors in the US believed that it was a historical opportunity that must not be missed and that the US had to act while that window of opportunity was open.
Syrian policy since 60 years, has stoped the gulf state,from recognizing Isreal,and limit the maneuverability,of president Mubarak, and king Husein of Jordan, to deal more friendly to Isreal,the general populace in the Arab world,are pro-syrian policy,Hamas and Jihad are pro syria, Islamic movements are pro syria, in many ways, all these , could continue to hinder american desire to help Isreal, this Syrian policy is correct one and myself is strongly for it, if you remove Syria from SAmoud and Tahaddi, the middle east would be at the feet of Isreal,surrendering to it.
Bianooni statement, that he will have dialoge with Isreal if he is in power, is probably political move , it will hurt him, and show me how much influence Khaddam had on him.
more arrest by security forces in Syria, arresting oppositio figures , will not help this regime, I think assasination of regime officials, is the next step,if this is not reversed.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
From Philip I (viarecta.blogspot.com)
Syrian Nationalist Party, whoever you are, just calm down! Life to you seems to be a great big, satanic conspiracy. SOUMMOOD AND TAHADDI are empty words used too often by demagogues. Strength and steadfastness are silent and come from within. Corrupt and despotic rulers, having weakened their nations, sell them down the river to the highest bidder. So, one day we are raped by the Israelis and greedy superpowers and the next day we are soddomised by the Iranians after being offered friendship and pocket money.
Wake up! No nation can survive by stupidly clinging to past glories, religion or questionable alliances. In order to build inner strength, people must be free and governments honest, representative and fair. Stop burying your head in the sand and put your own house in order first.
Philip I
Oh yes, smmoth morphene. Just surrunder to the beast.
For those among you with business backgrounds. If a company was bankrupt, financially, economically, morally etc. It would be wound up.
It is not in the current interest of the US at this present time to focus its energies on removal of this regime. The iraqi experience has taught it this. With the US focussed on the quagmire that is Iraq and Afghanistan and the Bush administration nearing the halfway point of its tenure a new adventure does not seem feasible.
It will pursue soft strategies aimed at unsettling and choking the life out of the regime, a slow form of chinese water torture. If the aim was regime change we would have heard more American voices directed against the regime for its attacks against the dissidents. Sadly this has not happened. Further proof that the administration for all its words have followed with empty actions.
I think that the next time for strategic matters will be the next change of the government and the tenure of the lebanese president, this will be next year. This will prove to be the litmus test.
The regime will just go on doing business as normal. The Arab governments can not support regime change at the moment. So it is safe for now.
Are we talking about the same CIA, and it's expert analysists, who among other achievements:
- could not see September 11 coming, confirmed the exsisttance of WMD in Iraq,
- still looking for bin Laden and Zawahri six years after the fact,
-could not actively forecast what will happen in Iraq once Sadam fell,
-could not foresee the October war coming,
-could not see the fall of the Shah coming,
-failed miserably in assesssing the reaction and the limits both Hafez al Assad and Yasser Arafat can go to in thier negotiations with Israel,
- could not see signs or the effects of the first and second intifada,
- could not do a million things that were more than obvious to a high school grader?
If it is the same CIA, then, I really beg you not waste time reading neither thier forcasts, nor thier analysis. They have nice gadgets, and they talk nice on TV shows, but they are so seperated away from reality that their primary contributions seem to be either blaming misdeeds on some other US Intellegince agency, or to do the Monday Morning quarterback pit.
I believe the US has lost a lot and is "actively" on the way of loosing more imperial assets, while those guys are the ones providing the total misguidance, and the self-assumed "overcomplicated" or "oversimplefied" view of the world. Either based on cheer uncompetence, or in the service of some unnamed interests.
And all mind you, with the highest technology and academic resorces availlable to anyone coupled with annual budgets capable of feeding half the world's poor for a years or end.
And they have the shameless nerve of "providing" analysis whenever called upon to do so... in the aftermath of things...of course.
You may wonder what do they tell thier spouses during pillow-talk about thier "contributions" and "successes" ??
I agree partly with ghassan and partly with ausamma (Osama?).
The WMD case was the legal format to conduct regime change in Iraq. In fact, Syria was one of the countries that voted unanimously for "serious consequnces" in UNSC resolution 1441.
But the WMD case was not the sole reason why the Bush Administration decided to topple Saddam.
If I were to believe Michael Scheuer, the US MSM, liberals, and other anti-Zionists, not only is Syria not a threat to the US, but also no other country in the world.
And if I were to believe the same people, the World Trade Center towers blew over and killed 3000 people in a huge wind storm.
But we know that wasn't the case.
9-11 was caused by Islamofascist terrorism. A terrorism that has killed many more Americans than Israelis over the past five years.
And we know where terrorism come from.
where is the arab brain:adding logic into the Arab/Israeli conflict and arab leaders
If I were to believe Michael Scheuer, the US MSM, liberals, and other anti-Zionists, not only is Syria not a threat to the US, but also no other country in the world.
If you were a moron you could make that statement. Just about everyone belives that Syria could pose a threat to Lebanon and may also some minor threat to the far more powerful Israel.
But you know what ? I believed the pro-Israeli neocons and the Bush administration when they said that pathetic IRaq posed a threat to the US.
I believed them when they said IRaq had bio, chem, nuclear WMDs.
I believed them when they Iraq had links to Al Qaeda.
And they were lying. Fuck them all.
I believed the pro-Israeli neocons and the Bush administration when they said that pathetic IRaq posed a threat to the US.
I believed them when they said IRaq had bio, chem, nuclear WMDs.
I believed them when they Iraq had links to Al Qaeda.
Dear Grim Ghost,
I, like you, believed the same.
I guess we were right.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/14/wterr14.xml
But then again, I don't think you and I really went too far out on a limb to believe such things...
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home