The U.S. abandons yet another ally

March 1, 2022 - 18:29

TEHRAN- It was the former United States Secretary of State and National Security Advisor under the presidential administrations of Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, Henry Kissinger, who declared “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.” Those words echo the reality of America’s foreign policy towards its alleged allies, not just over the past decades, but until today. 

Many countries in the world look to the U.S. for their security needs, mainly because America has the biggest military budget in the international community and with that money, it creates advanced and dangerous arms which it sells to wealthy and not-so-wealthy nations. 

Of course, this money is very much needed on domestic services to help the ever-increasing poverty, inflation unemployment, and other problems so in essence the U.S. has first and foremost abandoned the American people. And if you don’t care about your own people, will you really care about others? 

Nevertheless, the question remains; is Washington a reliable source for meeting any nation’s security guarantees? And perhaps the more important question is will those nations relying on Washington for security start to seek a more independent path in this regard. 

There is no need to go so far back in history to dig up evidence of how the U.S. actually uses countries around the globe and then completely abandons them when those same countries or people no longer serve the interests of the American deep state and establishment. 

The most recent case in point is certainly Ukraine but there are many on the list before Ukraine. 

As the U.S.-led NATO alliance egged the Ukrainian government of Volodymyr Zelensky to station weapons on Russian borders dangled the offer of NATO membership in front of Kyiv, but when the real fighting started, who stood behind Kyiv? 

Amid Washington and Europe’s crocodile eyes, a somber and angry Zelensky was left asking "who is ready to fight with us? I do not see anyone. Who is ready to give Ukraine a guarantee of NATO membership? Everyone is afraid."

The United States has not taken off the table a no-fly zone for Russian aircraft over American airspace. Indeed the European Union have banned Russian aircraft from the skies of the EU, but that’s hardly going to help Ukraine. 

Following an official request from Zelensky for the U.S. to impose a no-fly for Russian aircraft over Ukraine, Washington refused. 

"A no-fly zone would require implementation," White House spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters, adding it would require "deploying U.S. military to enforce, which would be ... potentially a direct conflict, and potentially a war with Russia, which is something we are not planning to be a part of."

Analysts say the bitter truth is that contrary to what Zelensky may have believed, Washington never actually considered the Ukrainian President as an ally. 

The U.S. just needed the proxy to fight the Russians and create tension in an attempt to contain an independent country such as Russia into armed conflict and try to damage it’s economy.

Experts say trying to damage Russia’s economy will backfire on Europe mostly, something also in Washington’s thought process.

Many analysts have pointed to veteran journalist John Laughland’s famous quote which he wrote as the early U.S.-backed color revolutions rampaged through the former Soviet Union about 16 years ago. 

“It is better to be an enemy of the Americans than their friend. If you are their enemy, they might try to buy you; but if you are their friend they will definitely sell you.”

After an unbelievable 20 years of backing Afghanistan’s government and armed forces; the U.S. suddenly decided to exclude the Afghan government from direct talks with the Taliban in Doha, Qatar last year. 

The same Taliban, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan to topple; but would later go on to regain power, and the U.S.-backed Afghan government and army for two decades were abandoned by Washington because the Pentagon believed the Afghan government and army were of no use to the U.S. any longer.

What was different in this case, is that the U.S. forces left Kabul in a disgraced manner. The self-proclaimed most powerful military in the world backed by trillions of dollars could not win a war that was the longest in U.S. history. America’s defeat here was on full public display for the entire world to see. And after 20 years, the U.S. only left behind a humanitarian disaster. 

Suddenly, countries, especially in West Asia who rely on American security, began to privately question the American military and what if the Pentagon suddenly abandons them too or does not have the ability to save them in a future conflict. 

Saudi Arabia is learning this the hard way after seven years of war in Yemen, the U.S. is slowly withdrawing its support, especially in the field of intelligence. 

In 2013, as part of efforts by the administration of then-President Barack Obama to overthrow the Syrian government, the CIA started a clandestine program to train, arm fund, and support the so-called free Syrian army in a third country. 

The militant group could not believe their luck despite the Syrian government offering amnesties to any Syrian with no blood on their hands who lay down their weapons and joined the political process instead.

However, the so-called Free Syrian Army was not effective as the Pentagon desired and Syrian government forces were liberating more land. By the summer of 2017; to the dismay of the militants, the CIA halted the covert program turning their focus instead to backing Daesh terrorists. 

The same fate would later await Syrian Kurds who at one point were fighting alongside U.S. forces illegally present in Syria. 

When the former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein waged an eight-year war on Iran, the U.S. had very warm ties with the former dictator during the war; to the extent that Saddam and high-ranking American officials exchanged letters by signing them on a first-name basis. This was in addition to the weapons America supplied Baghdad.

When the Saddam regime’s war on Iran ended, he invaded Kuwait under the belief that America would not interfere.

But since Saddam lost the war he waged on America’s enemy Iran and was of no use anymore to Washington, the U.S. military damaged almost all the former regimes military with the exception of the dictator’s Republican guard. This was of course planned. 

Then President George Bush Senior encouraged Iraq’s Shia and the Kurdish population in the country’s northern and southern provinces to topple the Iraqi regime promising to support them and impose a no-fly zone. In the words of the then American President, Saddam would fall if the “Iraqi people take matters into their own hands”

In the Islamic month of Sha’aban, the Iraqis launched an uprising, but the Americans knew very well, Saddam had helicopters, which America would not include in the no-fly zone. 

Saddam’s brutal Republican guards militarily outpowered the locals, they wiped out entire towns and villages, leveling residential neighborhoods to the ground and along with the hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children were buried in the rubble. Nobody was spared. 

The massacres took place while the U.S. stood by and watched on. 

The resentment of America would never be forgotten and when U.S. forces invaded the country again in 2003, they were met with the strong Iraqi resistance. 

But there have been allies as well, too many, in West Asia and beyond that depended on the U.S. but were abandoned. 

Former Egyptian ruler President Hosni Mubarak is a prime example. Former long-term Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi warmed up to the West who would then quickly turn on him too. There are many others but the list is long.

Some may think they are safe under U.S. supervision, but they may have to think again.

Leave a Comment

6 + 11 =