“Pseudo-left Parties Promote US-French-British Bombing of Syria”

These [pseudo-left] groups are pro-war because they belong to a privileged upper-middle-class layer that stands to benefit, materially, from the imperialist pillaging of the Middle East. Their pro-war proclamations reflect the right-wing shift among sections of the wealthiest 10 percent of American and European society whose stock portfolios have skyrocketed as a result of the financialization of the world economy and the global stock market boom.

Polls show massive opposition in the US, France, and the UK to the Syria strikes. This reflects the growing opposition of the working class to war, which takes place under conditions of a growth of the class struggle worldwide as evidenced most acutely in the three countries who launched Friday night’s strikes. The pseudo-left and the imperialist powers fear that the struggles of the working class will merge with broad antiwar sentiment among workers and youth…

Pseudo-left Parties Promote US-French-British Bombing of Syria

By Will Morrow
Global Research, April 16, 2018
World Socialist Web Site

A number of political parties that call themselves socialist proved they are nothing of the sort by lending support to Friday night’s illegal US, French and British bombing of Syria.

Groups like the American International Socialist Organization (ISO), Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the French New Anticapitalist Party (NPA) are pro-war organizations. They are participating in a propaganda campaign with the capitalist press organs and the intelligence agencies to spread the lie that the bombings are justified on a “humanitarian” basis and that additional military force is required. Socialists reject these attempts to cover imperialist intervention in a fraudulent “left” veneer.

First, these pseudo-left groups attack those who question the legitimacy of the CIA and MI6 claims that Assad used chemical weapons in Eastern Ghouta last week. They accept the claims produced by the same military intelligence agencies that spread the lie of “weapons of mass destruction” to justify the invasion of Iraq, which led to the deaths of over 1 million people.

The NPA’s Joseph Daher wrote in an April 10 titled “Syria: A nightmare without end” that the Syrian government “killed over 100 people in 24 hours, according to the first estimates, with especially strong suspicions of the use of chlorine and sarin gas.” Daher unquestionably accepts the claims that the Assad regime carried out a chemical gas attack in Ghouta on April 7. This charge has been promulgated throughout the media without evidence in order to justify an illegal war of aggression against Syria that has placed humanity on the verge of a nuclear world war between the US and Russia. In a post-bombing statement titled “With the Syrian people, against the bombings and all imperialist intervention,” the NPA called for a “rejection of the campaign to discredit the veracity of yet another criminal chemical attack by the regime.”

The ISO’s article from April 13, “US missiles won’t stop Syria’s suffering,” features a photo of a child on a ventilator taken from the widely circulated video that the CIA claims is “proof” that Assad used chemical weapons. The article states, “On April 7, a chemical attack carried out by the Syrian government forces in the city of Douma in southwestern Syria killed at least 43 people and left many others struggling to breathe.” The article declares that while the “Assad regime denied launching the chemical attack” and the “Russian government likewise claimed the reports of a gas attack were a ‘hoax,’” these “denials are a cruel lie.”

But US Defense Secretary James Mattis acknowledged Friday night in a press conference that he hadn’t found evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons until Friday afternoon, hours after the ISO’s article appeared. In other words, the ISO reached its guilty verdict before the Pentagon claims it reached theirs.

Second, the pseudo-left groups criticize the bombing campaign on the grounds that it does not go far enough and that more military intervention is required.

Writing for the NPA, Daher writes with concern that

“Donald Trump has reiterated his wish to withdraw from Syria, in spite of resistance among his closest advisors.”

He notes that such a retreat “is being encouraged by the principal powers intervening in Syria: Russia, Iran and Turkey.” Daher concludes by declaring that the “crimes of the Assad regime continue with the silence and complicity of the international and regional powers.” In an April 13 interview published on the website of International Viewpoint, the magazine of the Pabloite United Secretariat, Daher calls for the US to arm the Syrian rebels:

“We should also support the provision of weapons and arms to these democratic forces in the region to combat both counter-revolutionary forces.”

The ISO’s April 13 article criticizes the Obama administration because it “denied rebels access to anti-aircraft or anti-tank weaponry that would have given them a potentially decisive advantage against the Syrian military, which could have led to the fall of the regime altogether.” The article continued:

“From the beginning of the Arab Spring uprising in Syria, U.S. policy has been aimed at making sure some form of the current regime continues in Syria, with or without Assad. As the regime’s savage counterrevolution advanced, thanks to Russian military might, the U.S. has come to accept that Assad will stay, and the Russians will be the powerbrokers in the country.”

Jacobin magazine, the journal supported by the DSA, has not published a single recent article on the US threats against Syria nor on the bombings themselves. While Jacobin editor Bhaskar Sunkara remained silent about Trump’s threats to bomb Syria in the days before the attack, he found time to publish multiple tweets about the New York Knicks basketball team. Jacobin’s silence denotes consent and complacency.

The same is true for the Australian pseudo-left organization Socialist Alternative, which maintains close relations with the ISO in the US, and International Viewpoint, the magazine of the Pabloite, ex-Trotskyist United Secretariat. These groups are nothing more than propaganda wings of American, British, and French imperialism. They provide the intelligence agencies with a megaphone, spouting their justifications for war and coloring them with “left” sounding verbiage.

These groups are pro-war because they belong to a privileged upper-middle-class layer that stands to benefit, materially, from the imperialist pillaging of the Middle East. Their pro-war proclamations reflect the right-wing shift among sections of the wealthiest 10 percent of American and European society whose stock portfolios have skyrocketed as a result of the financialization of the world economy and the global stock market boom.

Polls show massive opposition in the US, France, and the UK to the Syria strikes. This reflects the growing opposition of the working class to war, which takes place under conditions of a growth of the class struggle worldwide as evidenced most acutely in the three countries who launched Friday night’s strikes. The pseudo-left and the imperialist powers fear that the struggles of the working class will merge with broad antiwar sentiment among workers and youth. The building of a mass movement in the working class opposed to war and inequality will take place in a conscious struggle against those groups who call themselves “left” while helping the imperialist powers fling bombs across the former colonial countries.

The original source of this article is World Socialist Web Site
Copyright © Will Morrow, World Socialist Web Site, 2018

https://www.globalresearch.ca/pseudo-left-parties-promote-us-french-british-bombing-of-syria/5636358

12 thoughts on ““Pseudo-left Parties Promote US-French-British Bombing of Syria”

  1. Among the left, as with everyone else, there is a lot of confusion about what is going on. I note the critique of ‘Joseph Daher’ and its implication is that Daher is a pseudo-leftist. I disagree, although I might concede that given the lack of organization and leadership among ordinary Syrians and the balance of forces on the ground in Syria, all overwhelmingly in favor of the Assad regime, it may well be that the best choice in the circumstances to avoid further and needless bloodshed, needless because of the overwhelming force arrayed against the genuine popular resistance, which in contradistinction to all claims otherwise, as reiterated, here, by Will Morrow, really does exist.

    To be honest, I’m no longer certain who the pseudo-leftist really are. Certainly, the individuals and groups Morrow here indicts are to my mind a far cry from being what Morrow claims they are. I’d accept that between the WSWS and the Australian Troskies there may be disagreements as to which tactics are to be recommended to the ordinary and insurgent factions of ordinary Syrians, but to claim that the likes of Daher and the Aurstralians are psedo-leftists strikes me as being more than a bit bizzare.

    To dispell any doubts that there really was a ‘Syrian uprising,’ all that one has to do is read Raymond Hinnebusch’s masterful analysis of the complicated events which resulted in the Syrian civil war, and note that Hinnebusch is not affiliated with any formal ‘leftist’ organization, but speaks as an independent and highly competent researcher of Middle Eastern affairs. Of course, to assert that Syrians really did rise up in numbers against the Ba’athist regime doesn’t mean that there wasn’t an attempt by so-called foreign powers to co-opt or quell (by terror) the insurgency by infiltrating ostensibly Salafist mercenaries. Furthermore, there is every indication that the Russians and Syrians and Iranians AND FUKUSA are working hand-in-glove to quash a popular insurgency that yet persists. Furthermore, insurgencies are occurring throughout the whole of the Middle East: what of Iraq and Yemen and Egypt and now Iran? This isn’t hard to understand, in my opinion.

    Consider this comment that I left over at Off-G only a few days ago:

    My Off-G comment begins:

    But . . . but . . . what if the idea is . . . oh . . . I don’t know . . . say to strengthen “the position of both Assad and Putin, because [the US, UK, and France] have given them the basis for rallying their own people around them against an external threat?”[1]

    Would then the missile attack not also have had the self-same appearance, namely, of seemingly showing that FUKUSA “. . . had no real appetite for regime change, still less for an unsimulated real life war,” while maintaining the illusion that FUKUSA is the mortal enemy of both Syria and Russia and, of course, Iran?

    I just read this in an article published by Al Jazeera:

    Quote begins:

    Despite the pathos with which US President Donald Trump announced the military operation, its result turned out to be less than modest. Putting aside the contradictory reports on how many missiles struck their intended targets, they did not cause any military casualties and failed to inflict any serious damage on Syrian military infrastructure. Compared to the recent Israeli air raid on the T-4 base, the result of the April 14 strikes seems rather insignificant.

    In this sense, the US, UK and French strikes were no different from the military action in April 2017, when after the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province, the US bombed regime-operated Shayrat airfield.

    The difference this year was that Washington blamed not only the Syrian regime for the chemical attack but also its patron, Moscow. This gave the situation a higher degree of tension, increasing speculations about a direct clash between the US and Russia.

    Direct confrontation was predictably avoided, and the whole operation seemed to be no more than a “performance”.

    Assad was content

    The party that stood to benefit the most from this situation was the Syrian regime and its allies. There was no change in the balance of power on the ground as a result of the strikes and forces loyal to the Syrian regime suffered no losses. [my emphasis — N.P.]

    A few hours after the strikes, Bashar al-Assad entered social media politics by posting a video of himself purportedly arriving triumphantly at his workplace in Damascus. Local and foreign media then showed scenes of Syrians celebrating in the streets.

    Assad seemed to weather the media speculation storm quite well, too. Last year, the US attacks on Shayrat military base took people by surprise and left the international media speculating on the possibility of more serious US military actions against the regime. This year, after the “perfectly executed” strikes – as Trump described them – it became clear that there is nothing much behind the White House rhetoric except populism.

    To Assad, it is clear that the US doesn’t have any strategy to resolve the Syrian conflict and is not even able to employ an effective mechanism to preclude the use of chemical weapons.

    Quote ends.

    What in all of this seems to be obvious but that I am not seeing?

    The Russians fire cruise missiles into Syria, and it helps the Syrian government; The U.S. and Co. fire cruise missiles into Syria, and — wouldn’t you know it — it also helps the Syrian government, and “did not cause any military casualties and failed to inflict any serious damage on Syrian military infrastructure.”

    Are the Americans really that weak, incompetent and intimidated?

    Or do all of the capitalist states having interests in the Middle East not have a common interest in keeping groups of seemingly restive someones under control?

    And doesn’t the restiveness appear to be general throughout the entire region. How are things in Yemen? What Iran? What about in Iraq? And Libya? How’s that working out?

    I wonder which is the scarier prospect: losing complete control over the masses of the Middle East or not getting a piece of the economic pie that everyone has already agreed upon behind the scenes, at the level of oligarchical negotiations?

    My Off-G comment ends.

    I left the gist of this comment over at Bramhall’s site. Her reply:

    Quote begins:

    Thanks for your comment, Norman. I think there’s growing evidence that Middle East restiveness, aka the Arab Spring was a deliberate CIA/State Dept “color revolution,” orchestrated by the same people who orchestrated the color revolutions in Eastern Europe. If you haven’t read Arabesque$: Enquête sur le rôle des États-Unis dans les révoltes arabes by Ahmed Bensaada, I think you would really enjoy it.

    https://stuartjeannebramhall.com/2015/10/27/the-arab-spring-made-in-the-usa/

    Quote ends.

    And this was my comeback:

    Quote begins:

    Thank you for the link, Stuart.

    I think there are a lot of moving parts to what is happening in the Middle East.

    CIA covert operations cannot determine spontaneous social movements that emerge out of social conditions that are structural and system-wide.

    At most, black ops can co-opt trends to the degree that the trends have not firmly consolidated into conscious networks and organizations that become the articulated conscious expression of mass movements.

    If the CIA and similar institutions are capable of ‘agency,’ ordinary people are also capable of ‘agency’ when conditions are both ripe and impel ‘group’ or ‘collective’ action.

    That people in the Middle East are indeed capable of and have demonstrated a capacity for conscious organization under difficult and repressive conditions is attested to by Ramond Hinnebusch, as but one example.

    This doesn’t mean that the awareness that accompanies these broadbased rebellions will be adequately informed by a comprehension of how to actually resolve their untenable circumstances, or that they aren’t vulnerable to being co-opted, but it does mean that people can of themselves and do sometimes become insurgent without either covert instigation or intervention by foreign powers, although to be sure, the state institutions and organized herarchical networks of local privilege being thus threatened by such instability will seek to misdirect popular grievances in such a way as to preempt either direct challenges to aspects of the social order or an outright overthrow, and one tactic is to blame a foreign power as being behind or orchestrating the mounting social chaos, which is not to discount that covert operations can indeed at the same time be inserted into the melee from without, be it in favor of either helping to fortify or to weaken the system of rule, all depending on an assessment of the balance of forces on the ground with an eye to those advantages percieved to be leverageable under the circumstances.

    Quote ends.

    In my opinion, there are elements of willful blindness and misinformation on all sides. Some refuse to believe that ordinary people are capable of acting en masse according to their own lights, however misguided they may be, that is to say, that ordinary Syrians really did and continue to make an attempt to escape the control of the current system of rule, and others don’t see that maybe the so-called revolution, although at hand, “has come too early,” meaning that the rebels don’t have a sufficient grasp of the structural dynamics of their predicament to be able to devise effective strategies for what is, in fact, a righteous rebellion.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Correction:

    My first paragraph should read:

    Among the left, as with everyone else, there is a lot of confusion about what is going on. I note the critique of ‘Joseph Daher’ and its implication is that Daher is a pseudo-leftist. I disagree, although I might concede that given the lack of organization and leadership among ordinary Syrians and the balance of forces on the ground in Syria, all overwhelmingly in favor of the Assad regime, it may well be that the best choice — in the circumstances to avoid further and needless bloodshed, needless because of the overwhelming force arrayed against the genuine popular resistance, which in contradistinction to all claims otherwise, as reiterated, here, by Will Morrow, really does exist – would be to desist or accept a tentative defeat.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Norm, I just read a potion of this, and your post today, which is also partly written here.

    You wrote,

    “Are the Americans really that weak, incompetent and intimidated?”

    Yes, I believe this government is this weak, incompetent and intimidated. And so do many of the authors I have read recently. I believe this government is completely insane, and scared shitless that their globalization agenda is falling apart right before their eyes.

    BUT… I understand what you are stating, or at least I think I do, and that is, Russia, the US and NATO could all be putting on some kind of grand performance, for the purpose of adding layers upon layers of confusion to what is already convoluted as hell.

    Am I reading you correctly, or even close?

    If so, then yes, you could be correct. As I’ve said before, I have no full proof evidence either way.

    But here is where I am at.

    It is my experience with the US mainstream media, that every item they pander continually, is a bald/bold faced lie intended to keep Americans away from what is really happening, the truth. And the mainstream media have been calling this a “civil war” from the beginning . and claiming that the military is involved in Syria in order to end the atrocities being committed by Assad against his people; atrocities that are later found to be lies or manipulations.

    As you know, this government has been pulling this same kind of false-flag/psy-op bullshit since the end of world war two. So why is Syria all of a sudden different? And yet, it could be different.

    The man (link) you speak of here, and the woman in the videos you posted, are they, or have they, been, in Syria while all of this is going on? I ask this, because I know Vanessa Beeley has been. And I have never gotten this (your) point of view from her.

    Also, when I posted this, I was thinking in terms of what I call the new left (pseudo left) here: Clinton and crew, and their promotion of continual war around the planet. I am not familiar with the left in France and elsewhere. And it is the US new left, along with the neocons, who seem to hold all the power in this mess.

    I don’t know, Norm! Truthfully, I think I am in over my head, with much of what you and Bramhall and others discuss.

    When it comes to my views on issues like these, I am strictly blue collar.

    Truthfully, I hope you are right here, because that means world war three is just marsh gas, at least for right now.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I just ran across this, and I think I need to listen to the author:

    “While “we the people” has always been a hallmark of the United States’ founding, most civilized nations contain similar mantras supporting the voices of the people to be prosperous, safe, and secure in their cultural homeland and society, free from anything and anyone that may threaten that safety or security. But our voices, our thoughts are only as informed as what we are provided. And until the mainstream takes a backseat to the truth in objective media outlets without mandatory scripts, we will be forced to search much harder to learn about our world and the issues that matter most. We must conduct extensive research to understand the underpinnings of policy and global injustices in order to grasp the knowledge our ancestors made sure we would be able to find. Perhaps, despite our technological advances, we are actually living in a time where we must learn to rely less on what the loudest sources are declaring, and venture back to a time where the people learned to work for true knowledge.”

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/424499-trump-russia-media-mainstream/

    Actually, a friend, just today, turned me on to some work that will take up more of my time.

    I need to find something else to do besides this. And I am permanently blocked, as a composer. So maybe I can get a bit of my sanity back?

    Liked by 1 person

  5. It’s all swamp gas, Dave. And there are plenty of people, Syrians actually, who have told their side of the story as actual participants in the uprising, which flat-out contradicts the claim of Beeley and Bartlett and others to the effect that there never was an ‘uprising.’ I’ve collected large amounts of irrefutable evidence from solid sources, that I’ve posted on my blog, attesting to the ‘fact’ that Syrians rebelled and that many in Syrian army defected to the side of the people when the soldiers were ordered to ‘crack’ down on the uppity masses.

    This isn’t to claim that Beeley and Bartlett aren’t writing the truth as they see it, but it does suggest that maybe they don’t have the entire perspective on the situation., that is to say, the whole of the story.

    Who is Joseph Daher? He is “a Swiss-Syrian socialist activist, founder of the blog Syria Freedom Forever, and the author of Hezbollah: The Political Economy of Lebanon’s Party of God.” He also completed a Doctorate in Development Studies at SOAS, University of London, and teaches at Lausanne University, Switzerland. He often travels to the Middle East to bear firsthand witness to the situations he investigates and writes about. Raymond Hinnebusch is also 100% reliable and is also heavily credentialled and absolutely knows what he is talking about. Michael Kardjis is also another heavy who teaches at the University of Western Sydney and who also has a bent for the Middle East, and in particular Syria.

    Finally, let me just say that just because someone has been “on the ground” in Syria doesn’t mean that person really knows what the fuck is going on. I live in Canada and know a lot of Canadians who are here on the ground with me, and guess what, they don’t have a clue about a lot of what’s going on, here, in Canada, just as I myself don’t.

    Knowing is about “information,” but also about being able to parse and analyze the information. From what I’ve read from Beeley, she’s not exactly a sociologist, political scientist, or political economist, disciplines that avail a person of category spectacles and material resources (research facilities and funds) essential to a proper investigation of real-world historical events.

    My intent is not to cast aspersions on anyone, in the manner of Morrow, but to point to other sources of information that a) contradict the meme that the Syrian regime is on the side of its ‘people’ and that it has been unfairly maligned and is a victim of imperialist aggression and that b) gives the lie to Morrow’s claim that the Aussie leftists are the ‘pro-imperialist’ apologists he claims they are. I know for a fact that they aren’t because I’ve read them firsthand, so I know he is full of shit. This doesn’t reflect on you in any way, but it does tell me just what sort of person this Morrow fella happens to be: either ill-informed and thus unreliable or an out-and-out slanderer, and from where I stand, the very thing he is accusing the Aussies of being.

    ’tis all. No big deal. Just saying.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Norm, I trust you! I know you are much better informed on these issues than I am. And I also know you love and are concerned for the people of this world, as am I.

    The most troubling thing to me is, without you recognizing this, and pointing it out to me, it never once registered with me as a possibility. And what that tells me is that I am way in over my head.

    Yes, Norm, I hear you. I have lived in this country my entire life, and I still have no REAL idea of what is happening here. I can only know by what info is available to me, my own experiences and educated guessing.

    I just realized yesterday, it was a year ago that I tried to quit blogging. And here I am, a year later, and as burned out as ever.

    I have kept going, because I wanted to help, if I could, and I needed to do this, believe it or not, for my sanity.

    This has nothing to do with you or today, but it seems to me, and it has for a while now, that doing this is a waste of time, especially if I’m just adding to the confusion.

    And how am I truly to know what the truth is? There is no way.

    Yes, Norm, it is all swamp gas. And at the moment anyway, I am burned out on it.

    I need to think things over. This has been a bad winter for me, especially with health issues. And I feel, quite often, overwhelmed, and I know I am not alone, by the way.

    Thanks, Norm. I”m going to reblog your post, so others can hear your point!

    Like

  7. Actually, I took it down for a moment to check that I wasn’t rushing to judgment. I needed to make sure of the connection between Sandra Bloodworth and the Aussie “Socialist Alternative,” and indeed, Bloodworth seems to have been one of the founding memebers of that. With that out of the way, the article is back up. Of course, apart from Daher and the Aussie ‘Socialist Alternative,’ I can’t speak to any of the other “pseudo-leftists” Morrow decries.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.