- Editorials
- Posted
Kassioun Editorial 1167: “If a Sinner Gives You News, Verify its Truthfulness”
On March 22, a website named “al-Markazia” published an article entitled: “A paper of an American-Syrian understanding paving the way for the settlement phase”. The article claimed being based on a former minister with close knowledge of the paper, which included 13 points, including the demarcation of the borders with “Israel,” as a step towards peace in the region. The former minister said – again, as claimed by al-Markazia – that “Damascus rejects war and the opening of fronts, which it has implemented since October 7, as, unlike Hezbollah, it did not allow using its territory as a platform to confront Israel, even within the framework of supporting Gaza”.
Publishing an article like this may seem accidental or “slipped”, and it does not require attention or response. However, placing it within the general context of many events that coincide therewith, as well as understanding the American hybrid warfare mechanisms, makes responding to such articles critical.
Let’s start by trying to put things within their context, as this article coincides with several phenomena, including:
- Statements made in an appearance on the Syrian news channel by a member of the Syrian People’s Assembly, Dr. Nabil Tohme, which are along the lines of faulting the Palestinian resistance’s decision in and claiming that it is divided, and that dialogue with the entity is the right choice.
- Some people continue working day and night to complete the implementation of the recipes of the IMF and World banks, which operate under American command; those people have almost reached the end by nearly completely lifting all subsidies.
- The increasing role in Syria of countries completely normalized with the Zionist enemy, and clearly working against the Palestinian cause, against Algeria, and even against Egypt in Sudan.
- Syrian opposition figures, who officially work in US administration agencies, come out with surprising “conciliatory” initiatives, talking about going to Damascus without UNSC Resolution 2254, and practically in order to bury it for good.
- In the background of all of this, there is a clear timeline since mid-2016, with the West moving from the slogan of overthrowing the regime, to the slogan of “changing the regime’s behavior”, which both the “step for step” and the exaggerated talk about “decentralization and autonomous governance” have become tools in the implementation thereof, all the way to “changing the image of the regime”. The actual goal is to remove Syria from its historical position and place it in a completely opposite position.
Taken together, this atmosphere, which allows for creating the impression of believing, makes a clear official response to talk about an American-Syrian paper of understanding, and to calls for normalization, necessary and extremely important. It is known that the media aspect of hybrid warfare is fundamental and is often more important than the security and military aspects.
The American attempt to attribute the terrorist attack in the Moscow suburbs to ISIS is a typical example of the hybrid war it is waging. What is intended is to try blowing up the internal divisions within Russian society, especially those along nationalist and then religious lines.
Returning to the Syrian case, and because it is the same American-Zionist enemy, a clear official response to these statements and assumptions is very necessary in the patriotic sense.
This response cannot be limited to verbally confirming the distance with the US, but rather it should include concrete actions against American sabotage in the media and in the awareness arena on the one hand, and on the other hand concrete actions towards ending the crisis itself, which is the most fertile ground for sabotage. Ending the crisis cannot happen without the full implementation of UNSC Resolution 2254, against the will of the US, which seeks to bury the resolution, and must be carried out in a way that allows the Syrian people, who have a high sense of patriotism, to decide their own fate.