After deciding not to attack directly: USA started arming the mujhahdeensCIA starts arming Syrian re

[Ahud1]

CIA starts arming Syrian rebels overtly

Published time: September 12, 2013 11:37

A Free Syrian Army fighter (Reuters/Yazan Homsy)

In the past two weeks the US has reportedly begun delivering arms to militants fighting the Syrian government. Washington expects the CIA to monitor the delivery so that the aid does not end up in the hands of Al-Qaeda associates.

According to the Washington Post report, after months ofpromises to provide aid to Syrian rebels in an ‘official’ manner, Washington has finally sanctioned open delivery of arms and munitions to anti-Assad forces - despite fears that some of the weapons could end up in the hands of Islamic fundamentalists.

Already back in April the US Secretary of State John Kerry promised that official ‘nonlethal’ aid would start flowing “in a matter of weeks.” In May the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations had passed a bill that would allow, if signed, the Obama administration to supply arms to Syrian opposition. However, in reality it took months before the Obama administration made up its mind.

The biggest hindrance for Washington to aid Syrian rebels has always been the ever growing presence of Al-Qaeda jihadists among rebel ranks.

In the end the decision was made at a time when President Barack Obama was considering missile strikes on sovereign Syrian state pursuing the aim of ousting President Bashar Assad. So far there has been no official comment from the CIA.

The lethal aid is primarily being channeled to fighters subordinate to General Salim Idriss, the commander of the Supreme Military Council of the rebel forces who defected from the Syrian Army last year. This faction of dissociated armed opposition groups is considered to be smaller evil if compared to other jihadist militant units with proven links to internationally recognized terrorist organizations, such as Al-Nusra Front, which is associated with the Iraqi branch of Al-Qaeda.

The CIA controls and tracks the delivery of reportedly light weapons and other munitions via countries bordering Syria, such as Turkey and Jordan. The US State Department has its own separate program of delivering vehicles and other non-lethal gear, such as communication equipment, advanced combat medical kits and high-calorie food packets to the Syrian opposition forces using the same supply channels.

“The Supreme Military Council is receiving so little support that any support we receive is a relief,” Khaled Saleh, a spokesman for the Syrian Opposition Coalition, is reported as saying.

Two-and-a-half years of ongoing bloodshed in Syria has not given a decisive advantage to either side of the conflict. In this situation American aid could give the Syrian armed rebel forces an upper hand over the government troops on the battlefield. Also, the US officials admit, the weapons supply should cheer up the rebel troops that have been suffering massive losses lately.

“They see their leadership is having some impact,” told the Washington Post the State Department’s senior adviser on assistance to Syria Mark S. Ward, responsible for coordination of nonlethal aid delivery to the Syrian rebels from Turkey.

Source: http://rt.com/usa/us-weapons-syrian-rebels-745/

 

[ammadk]

holy sh*t its recoil less rifle...its aaaa dramatic change of circumstances

 

[hans]

The Obama administration is getting assistance from outside allies also trying to sell Congress on authorizing a military strike against Syria. Among the most prominent: strong backers of Israel.


Casino magnate and top GOP contributor Sheldon Adelson surprised many recently by offering to help President Obama get a resolution passed on Syria. And Capitol Hill was blanketed this week by some 300 lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.


Israel's advocates have close ties with many lawmakers. According to the interest-group tracking website Maplight, Senate Majority Whip **** Durbin is the sixth biggest recipient in Congress of campaign contributions from pro-Israel political action groups.


Like many other Democratic lawmakers who receive such funds, Durbin cites Israel in explaining his support for military action against Syria. "When it comes to the nation of Israel, our closest and best ally in the Middle East, they understand what we are trying to do with chemical weapons in Syria," Durbin said earlier this week on the Senate floor. "And they've made it clear through their friends in the United States and other ways, that they support it without fear of retaliation by Syria."


That's the same kind of message lawmakers have been getting in person this week from AIPAC's fleet of lobbyists. American University congressional expert James Thurber ranks AIPAC among Washington's top special interest groups. "If you look at the support for Israel by the United States, they are a key part of that," says Thurber. "They've been very successful on all the major issues related to Israel."


As a 501(c)4 organization, AIPAC cannot make campaign contributions — but it's seen as influencing many pro-Israel groups that do. (AIPAC declined a request to comment on the record for this report.)


For most lawmakers, Thurber says, loyalty to Israel and its supporters has been a given — except when it comes to a military strike against Syria. "They've voted with AIPAC, AIPAC gives them high ratings in terms of loyalty," he says, "but right now they're split, because their constituents are going in another direction."


Indeed, as AIPAC's lobbyists swarmed Capitol Hill on Tuesday, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell — the third biggest beneficiary in Congress of pro-Israel contributions — went to the Senate floor to announce that the resolution the Foreign Relations panel approved last week authorizing military action against Syria did not pass muster. "So I will be voting against this resolution. A vital national security risk is clearly not at play," McConnell said, adding, "there are just too many unanswered questions about our long-term strategy in Syria."


McConnell is up for re-election next year in his home state of Kentucky. Longtime Kentucky political analyst Al Cross isn't surprised by McConnell's decision to break ranks on this issue with pro-Israel contributors. "He's a party leader who wants to remain party leader, and his party is clearly, the majority of his party is against this," says Cross, "and he faces an opponent in the primary who's against it."


No. 2 Senate Republican John Cornyn, who's seeking re-election next year, too, has also come out against the Syria resolution.


University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer, who co-authored a book on the pro-Israel lobby's influence in Congress, says AIPAC has limited clout on Syria. "It almost always gets its way on issues like the Israel-Palestine conflict, on foreign aid to Israel, and on protecting Israel in the United Nations," he says. "But when it comes to pushing the United States to use military force against another country because it's seen as being in Israel's interest, the lobby does not always get its way."


Even lawmakers who do agree with AIPAC on Syria say its lobbying has not influenced them. "I voted before AIPAC took a position on this," says Maryland Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin, a member of the panel that passed the Syria resolution last week, "so I have supported the resolution from the beginning."


So too have most other congressional leaders — from both parties. Still, American University's Thurber says there's a good reason why that resolution was pulled Wednesday from the Senate floor. "It looks like they're not going to get the votes," says Thurber, "and so it is something, at least on this issue, that's rare, that you have all those people together, and rare that it looks like they may lose."


And that would also be a rare outcome for AIPAC's lobbyists.