美國在敘利亞的真正角色
https://sandersinstitute.org/blog-americas-true-role-in-syria
傑弗裏·薩克斯 來源：項目辛迪加 / 2016 年 8 月 30 日
敘利亞內戰是地球上最危險和最具破壞性的危機。 不幸的是，巴拉克·奧巴馬總統向美國人民和世界輿論隱瞞了美國在敘利亞的角色，這極大地加劇了危險。
敘利亞內戰是地球上最危險和最具破壞性的危機。 自2011年初以來，已有數十萬人死亡； 約一千萬敘利亞人流離失所； 歐洲因伊斯蘭國（ISIS）恐怖活動和難民的政治影響而震動； 美國及其北約盟國不止一次險些與俄羅斯發生直接對抗。
不幸的是，巴拉克·奧巴馬總統向美國人民和世界輿論隱瞞了美國在敘利亞的角色，這極大地加劇了危險。 結束敘利亞戰爭需要美國對其自 2011 年以來在敘利亞衝突中持續且往往是秘密的角色進行誠實的核算，包括誰在資助、武裝、訓練和慫恿各方。 這種曝光將有助於結束許多國家的魯莽行為。
一種普遍且錯誤的看法是，奧巴馬讓美國遠離敘利亞戰爭。 事實上，美國右翼經常批評他在化學武器問題上為敘利亞總統巴沙爾·阿薩德畫了一條底線，然後在阿薩德據稱越線時又退縮了（這個問題仍然模糊且有爭議，就像敘利亞的其他許多問題一樣）。 敘利亞）。 英國《金融時報》的一位主要專欄作家最近重申了美國一直袖手旁觀的錯誤觀點，暗示奧巴馬拒絕了時任國務卿希拉裏·克林頓的建議，即武裝敘利亞叛軍對抗阿薩德。
然而帷幕時不時就會被掀開。 一月份，《紐約時報》最終報道了 2013 年總統向中央情報局下達的一項秘密命令，要求武裝敘利亞叛軍。 正如該賬戶所解釋的那樣，沙特阿拉伯為軍備提供了大量資金，而中央情報局則根據奧巴馬的命令提供組織支持和培訓。
不幸的是，這個故事沒有得到美國政府的進一步闡述，也沒有得到《紐約時報》的跟進。 公眾被蒙在鼓裏：中央情報局與沙特正在進行的行動有多大？ 美國每年在敘利亞花費多少錢？ 美國、沙特、土耳其、卡塔爾和其他國家向敘利亞叛軍提供哪些類型的武器？ 哪些團體正在接收武器？ 美軍、空中掩護和其他人員在戰爭中扮演什麽角色？ 美國政府沒有回答這些問題，主流媒體也沒有追究這些問題。
奧巴馬曾十多次告訴美國人民，“地麵上不會有美國靴子”。 然而，每隔幾個月，公眾就會在一份簡短的政府聲明中得知，美國特種作戰部隊正在被部署到敘利亞。 五角大樓經常否認他們在前線。 但當俄羅斯和阿薩德政府最近對敘利亞北部的叛軍據點進行轟炸和炮擊時，美國通知克裏姆林宮，這些襲擊正在威脅美國地麵部隊。 公眾沒有得到關於他們的任務、成本或敘利亞對手方的任何解釋。
通過偶爾的泄密、調查報告、其他政府的聲明以及美國官員的罕見聲明，我們知道美國正在進行一場積極的、持續的、中央情報局協調的戰爭，目的是推翻阿薩德並打擊伊斯蘭國。 美國在反阿薩德努力中的盟友包括沙特阿拉伯、土耳其、卡塔爾和該地區其他國家。 美國已花費數十億美元用於武器、訓練、特種作戰部隊、空襲以及對包括國際雇傭軍在內的叛軍的後勤支持。 美國的盟友又花費了數十億美元。 確切的金額沒有報告。
美國公眾對這些決定沒有發言權。 美國國會尚未進行授權投票或預算批準。 中央情報局的角色從未得到解釋或證明其合理性。 美國行動的國內和國際合法性從未向美國人民或世界辯護。
對於美國軍工聯合體的核心人員來說，這種保密是理所應當的。 他們的立場是，15 年前國會投票授權對 9/11 襲擊事件的責任人使用武力，這讓總統和軍方全權在中東和非洲進行秘密戰爭。 美國為何要公開解釋自己的所作所為？ 這隻會危及行動並增強敵人的力量。 公眾不需要知道。
我同意不同的觀點：戰爭應該是最後的手段，並且應該受到民主審查的約束。 這場較量
他認為，美國在敘利亞的秘密戰爭無論是根據美國憲法（賦予國會唯一宣戰權）還是根據《聯合國憲章》都是非法的，美國在敘利亞的雙邊戰爭是一場憤世嫉俗和魯莽的賭博。 美國主導的推翻阿薩德的努力並不是像奧巴馬和克林頓不時暗示的那樣是為了保護敘利亞人民，而是美國針對伊朗和俄羅斯的代理人戰爭，而敘利亞恰好是這場戰爭的戰場。
這場戰爭的賭注比美國代理人戰士想象的要高得多、危險得多。 隨著美國對阿薩德發動戰爭，俄羅斯加大了對其政府的軍事支持。 在美國主流媒體看來，俄羅斯的行為是一種侮辱：克裏姆林宮怎麽敢阻止美國推翻敘利亞政府？ 其結果是與俄羅斯的外交衝突不斷擴大，這種衝突可能升級並可能無意中導致軍事衝突。
這些問題都應該受到法律審查和民主監督。 我相信，美國人民會對美國領導的敘利亞政權更迭戰爭大聲說“不”。 美國人民想要安全 — — 包括擊敗伊斯蘭國 — — 但他們也認識到美國領導的政權更迭努力的漫長而災難性的曆史，包括在阿富汗、伊拉克、利比亞、敘利亞、中美洲、非洲和東南亞。
這是美國安全國家拒絕說出真相的主要原因。 美國人民會呼籲和平而不是永久戰爭。 奧巴馬隻剩下幾個月的任期來修複他破碎的政治遺產。 他應該首先向美國人民坦白。
America's True Role In Syria
BY Jeffrey Sachs PROJECT SYNDICATE / AUGUST 30, 2016
Photo: Rizwan Tabassum / Agence France-Presse / Getty Images
Syria’s civil war is the most dangerous and destructive crisis on the planet. Unfortunately, President Barack Obama has greatly compounded the dangers by hiding the US role in Syria from the American people and from world opinion.
Syria’s civil war is the most dangerous and destructive crisis on the planet. Since early 2011, hundreds of thousands have died; around ten million Syrians have been displaced; Europe has been convulsed with Islamic State (ISIS) terror and the political fallout of refugees; and the United States and its NATO allies have more than once come perilously close to direct confrontation with Russia.
Unfortunately, President Barack Obama has greatly compounded the dangers by hiding the US role in Syria from the American people and from world opinion. An end to the Syrian war requires an honest accounting by the US of its ongoing, often secretive role in the Syrian conflict since 2011, including who is funding, arming, training, and abetting the various sides. Such exposure would help bring to an end many countries’ reckless actions.
A widespread – and false – perception is that Obama has kept the US out of the Syrian war. Indeed, the US right wing routinely criticizes him for having drawn a line in the sand for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over chemical weapons, and then backing off when Assad allegedly crossed it (the issue remains murky and disputed, like so much else in Syria). A leading columnist for the Financial Times, repeating the erroneous idea that the US has remained on the sidelines, recently implied that Obama had rejected the advice of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to arm the Syrian rebels fighting Assad.
Yet the curtain gets lifted from time to time. In January, the New York Times finally reported on a secret 2013 Presidential order to the CIA to arm Syrian rebels. As the account explained, Saudi Arabia provides substantial financing of the armaments, while the CIA, under Obama’s orders, provides organizational support and training.
Unfortunately, the story came and went without further elaboration by the US government or follow up by the New York Times. The public was left in the dark: How big are the ongoing CIA-Saudi operations? How much is the US spending on Syria per year? What kinds of arms are the US, Saudis, Turks, Qataris, and others supplying to the Syrian rebels? Which groups are receiving the arms? What is the role of US troops, air cover, and other personnel in the war? The US government isn’t answering these questions, and mainstream media aren’t pursuing them, either.
On more than a dozen occasions, Obama has told the American people that there would be “no US boots on the ground.” Yet every few months, the public is also notified in a brief government statement that US special operations forces are being deployed to Syria. The Pentagon routinely denies that they are in the front lines. But when Russia and the Assad government recently carried out bombing runs and artillery fire against rebel strongholds in northern Syria, the US notified the Kremlin that the attacks were threatening American troops on the ground. The public has been given no explanation about their mission, its costs, or counterparties in Syria.
Through occasional leaks, investigative reports, statements by other governments, and rare statements by US officials, we know that America is engaged in an active, ongoing, CIA-coordinated war both to overthrow Assad and to fight ISIS. America’s allies in the anti-Assad effort include Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, and other countries in the region. The US has spent billions of dollars on arms, training, special operations forces, air strikes, and logistical support for the rebel forces, including international mercenaries. American allies have spent billions of dollars more. The precise sums are not reported.
The US public has had no say in these decisions. There has been no authorizing vote or budget approval by the US Congress. The CIA’s role has never been explained or justified. The domestic and international legality of US actions has never been defended to the American people or the world.
To those at the center of the US military-industrial complex, this secrecy is as it should be. Their position is that a vote by Congress 15 years ago authorizing the use of armed force against those culpable for the 9/11 attack gives the president and military carte blanche to fight secret wars in the Middle East and Africa. Why should the US explain publicly what it is doing? That would only jeopardize the operations and strengthen the enemy. The public does not need to know.
I subscribe to a different view: wars should be a last resort and should be constrained by democratic scrutiny. This view holds that America’s secret war in Syria is illegal both under the US Constitution (which gives Congress the sole power to declare war) and under the United Nations Charter, and that America’s two-sided war in Syria is a cynical and reckless gamble. The US-led efforts to topple Assad are not aimed at protecting the Syrian people, as Obama and Clinton have suggested from time to time, but are a US proxy war against Iran and Russia, in which Syria happens to be the battleground.
The stakes of this war are much higher and much more dangerous than America’s proxy warriors imagine. As the US has prosecuted its war against Assad, Russia has stepped up its military support to his government. In the US mainstream media, Russia’s behavior is an affront: how dare the Kremlin block the US from overthrowing the Syrian government? The result is a widening diplomatic clash with Russia, one that could escalate and lead – perhaps inadvertently – to the point of military conflict.
These are issues that should be subject to legal scrutiny and democratic control. I am confident that the American people would respond with a resounding “no” to the ongoing US-led war of regime change in Syria. The American people want security – including the defeat of ISIS – but they also recognize the long and disastrous history of US-led regime-change efforts, including in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Central America, Africa, and Southeast Asia.
This is the main reason why the US security state refuses to tell the truth. The American people would call for peace rather than perpetual war. Obama has a few months left in office to repair his broken legacy. He should start by leveling with the American people.
