Answer to a Question
Question:
From monitoring the course of events regarding the recent truce in Syria until today, it seems that America is serious this time about the truce and holding negotiations to establish a secular government in Syria composed of the opposition and the regime. Is this correct? Does this mean America has abandoned the idea of finding an alternative agent for the current agent, Bashar, and that it has decided on Bashar’s continuation in power?
Another question, if I may: the situation in Libya seems to become more complicated every time it nears a solution. They agreed in Skhirat, and the agreement recognized the legitimacy of the Tobruk parliament, which is a gain for Tobruk... nevertheless, it procrastinates in giving confidence to the government, even though Al-Sarraj has responded by reducing the number of ministers from 32 to 18. How can this procrastination be understood? May Allah reward you with goodness.
Answer:
We previously issued an "Answer to a Question" on 19/01/2016 titled "Latest Developments in the Libyan Crisis," in which we clarified the Libyan issue... Similarly, we issued a leaflet about Syria on 11/12/2015 titled "Two Imminent Evils in One..." regarding the Riyadh conference and the formation of the negotiation body. We also issued another leaflet on 24/02/2016 titled "The Truce for the Regime’s Security in Munich was Woven by America..." in which we clarified the current truce and negotiations. This was detailed, and the answer can be understood from it, as the map of events remained within the general line we explained in those publications... nevertheless, here is further clarification... but before that, I will clarify a difference in the conflict between Syria and Libya:
The issue of Libya differs from that of Syria because the conflict in Syria is between America, its allies, and its followers on one side, and the people of Syria on the other. It is not between America and another major power. This is because Russia is implementing America's plan in a dirty deal, as Putin thinks that by serving America in Syria, it will ease the problems of Russia's southern borders around Ukraine... As for Europe, it revolves around America, repeating what it says to gain something or a part of something from it! Both Russia and Europe realize that the influence belongs to America, and they do not aspire to compete with it for influence in Syria... meaning the conflict is between America and the people of Syria and every sincere Muslim behind them.
As for Libya, the conflict is over influence between America and Europe, specifically Britain and France to some extent, followed by Italy... Therefore, America is taken aback by the steadfastness of the people of Syria against its plans during the five years of the Syrian revolution. However, in Libya, it is confident in its power against Europe, so it struggles with some reassurance of this power against Europe...
After explaining this difference, we will mention more clarification regarding what came in the question:
First: The Syrian Issue:
As for America being serious about the truce and negotiations, this is true... But as for it abandoning the search for a next alternative agent to the current agent Bashar, this is not true. At the moment it finds a replacement, it will end Bashar's function as it did with its followers before. The explanation is as follows:
America has put all its weight into stopping the revolution and crushing it under the names of truces, ceasefires, cessation of hostilities, and cessation of combat... It held conferences in Geneva, Vienna, and Riyadh, and issued resolutions in the Security Council... this is in addition to its work to abort the revolution through military actions by its agent Bashar, Iran, its party in Lebanon, and Russia, while America itself intervened and dragged other countries with it under the cover of the international coalition on the pretext of fighting the Daesh organization and terrorism... Finally, it found a breathing space through the Munich meeting on 12/02/2016 in an attempt to stop the revolution within a week by a ceasefire. When that did not happen, its Secretary of State, Kerry, met with his Russian counterpart, Lavrov, on 22/02/2016, and they announced in a joint statement that the cessation of fighting would take effect at midnight on Friday/Saturday, 27/02/2016. All of this is a prelude to approving its secular project in the negotiations it is seriously preparing for in Geneva in the coming days... The evidence that America is serious is the measures it has taken in this direction, especially since 9-10/12/2015, when the Riyadh conference was held to prepare the opposition's negotiation body for talks with the regime. Among these measures:
1- America’s preparation for a support base inside Syria through the influence of its followers "Turkey and Saudi Arabia" by creating an atmosphere encouraging negotiation without objection. Indicators of this include:
a- It tasked Saudi Arabia with gathering followers and cronies in Riyadh, especially from the armed factions, and forming the negotiation body using the "carrot and thick stick" approach with money and weapons... It succeeded in this and formed that body from those who sold their Hereafter for the worldly life of others... Thus, America, for the first time since the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, was able to include armed factions in the negotiation committees that accept negotiation to share rule with the regime. ("In a press conference held on Thursday evening, the head of the Gulf Research Center, Abdulaziz Al-Sager, said that a delegation from the opposition would meet with a delegation from the regime in the first ten days of next January... The agreement stipulates the formation of a High Negotiations Committee of 32 members, including ten for the factions, nine for the Coalition, five for the Coordination Body, and eight independents.") (Al Jazeera Net, 11/12/2015). Previously, the negotiators were residents of the outside who had no shelter inside... Therefore, those factions that joined the body have let down the people, especially those who were supporting them because they thought they arose to rid them of that tyrant!
b- Erdogan's visit to Saudi Arabia to discuss the truce and negotiations to implement the American project in Syria and to convince their factions in Syria to agree to the truce and the formation of an opposition body to participate in the negotiations: ("Turkish President Erdogan arrived Tuesday in Saudi Arabia for a visit during which he will discuss regional files with officials, especially Syria and Yemen. Shortly after his arrival at King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh, Erdogan moved to Al-Yamamah Palace where he was received by Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz, according to the official Saudi Press Agency.") (Al-Quds, 29/12/2015).
c- America held preliminary meetings for the negotiators to tame them to the solutions it intends to carry out. When it expected things to proceed as it wanted, it sealed the ring with a rapid, unusual rapprochement between Turkey and Iran. This was represented by Davutoglu's visit to Iran despite the heated statements between them, in order to coordinate between them using their influence on their factions and followers in Syria to implement the American project in Syria... ("Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu arrived Friday night, March 4, in the Iranian capital Tehran at the head of a delegation including several ministers, in the first visit by a Turkish Prime Minister to Iran in two years... The Iranian Fars agency reported that the Turkish Prime Minister will meet with senior Iranian officials to discuss ways to develop and consolidate economic and trade cooperation between the two countries...") (Russia Today, 04/03/2016). It seems they covered the visit with a tasteless joke that would not deceive even simple people, showing that the meeting was for "commercial purposes"!!
2- During these malicious political acts by its agents to prepare the regional and internal atmosphere for negotiations, it was creating pressuring atmospheres to implement the American project through actions ranging from falsifying facts to show that the negotiated solution offered by America is the best solution for Syria... to military actions by itself, or by Russia which is moving with it in a dirty deal, or by its regional and local followers and tools... Among these actions:
a- America worked to focus on the idea that the people of Syria are between two choices: either agreeing to America's secular project for Syria during negotiations, or the partition of Syria... Because it realizes that the people of Syria repel partition, it thought they would accept negotiations to approve its secular project in Syria by forming a joint government between the regime and the opposition... To give credibility to this idea, America and Russia made statements about partition to pressure the negotiations, frightening the negotiators and creating a very heated atmosphere for the people of Syria, suggesting that if they do not agree to America's project to create a secular state from the regime and the opposition, then Syria will not remain united but will be partitioned... Therefore, Kerry stated: ("It may be too late to keep Syria united if we wait much longer") (Reuters, 23/02/2016)... Russia also spoke about federalism in Syria, as Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov stated: ("Moscow hopes that the participants in the Syrian negotiations will reach the idea of creating a federal republic, which is the demand sought by the Kurds") (Al-Hadath channel, 29/02/2016)... All of this is to pressure the opposition negotiators to approve the political system that America will impose, or else it would be partition... America and its allies forgot or pretended to forget that just as the people of Syria reject partition, they also reject America's secular project, and they consider both projects to be imminent evils formulated by America, which will only pass through the traitors of the Ummah, and they are headed for demise, by Allah’s leave...
b- Intensifying Russian raids during negotiations as a message directed to the negotiators to accept the talks to approve America's project, or else the raids would intensify. Therefore, Russian raids intensified noticeably during the Geneva 3 talks that began in early February 2016, and they were intensifying the siege on Aleppo as a means of pressure on the negotiators...
c- Hinting with a veiled, or rather open, threat to everyone who rejects negotiations. In this context, Kerry stated on 24/02/2016: ("There is a significant discussion taking place now regarding a Plan B if we are not successful at the table.") (Reuters, 24/02/2016). Al-Jubeir repeated his master's saying: ("...and if we are unable to continue the truce, there are other options, as mentioned by the US Secretary of State, there is a Plan B, if it becomes clear that there is no seriousness on the part of the Syrian regime or its allies, the other option is possible, and the focus will be on it") (CNN Arabic website, 28/02/2016).
From the above, it is clear that America is indeed serious about the truce and negotiations to achieve its secular project for Syria.
It seems these means succeeded in being a pretext and justification for the opposition negotiation body to continue negotiating with the regime: ("UN Special Envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura announced yesterday that a new round of talks aimed at stopping the conflict in Syria will be held in Geneva from March 14 to 24 under the supervision of the international organization...") (Ar-Riyadh, Thursday, 10/03/2016). Then the opposition negotiation body began preparing the atmosphere for agreeing to negotiations ("The High Negotiations Committee, which represents Syrian opposition factions, said today, Wednesday, March 9, 2016, that it sees the agenda proposed by the United Nations for peace talks as positive and that it noticed a decrease in government forces' violations of the truce the previous day. Salem al-Meslet, spokesman for the High Negotiations Committee, said it would soon take a final decision regarding participation in the negotiations scheduled in Geneva.") (DW, 09/03/2016). Then the Russia Today website reported on 11/03/2016: ("The High Negotiations Committee 'Syrian opposition' announced it will participate in the upcoming round of negotiations in Geneva next Monday...") (Russia Today website, 11/03/2016).
2- As for America abandoning the search for an alternative agent, this is not correct... This is because Bashar has lost the ability to ensure a stable rule in Syria through which he can serve America's interests. Rather, America wants him to remain in the transitional phase, during which it can search for a new agent with a face less dark than Bashar's, who can deceive the people, implement its interests, and smile at the people! America is interested in establishing a secular agent rule in Syria that serves its interests as Bashar and his father did before. Even the foul smell of partition it spread is unlikely to be adopted in Syria unless it fails to establish the next alternative agent to the current agent Bashar... Therefore, what matters to America now is the ceasefire to work calmly in implementing its projects by creating a secular rule from the regime and the opposition until it finds the replacement to take Bashar's place... America considers this ceasefire and the opposition's commitment to it—especially since it was able to involve some so-called "Islamic" factions in accepting the truce and negotiations—as its greatest success in five years in confronting the revolution against its influence and agents in Ash-Sham... Russia also considered this a great success and an opportunity to stabilize the regime. Therefore, Russia's representative to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, told Kommersant newspaper commenting on the Munich agreement: ("Damascus, I hope, realizes that this is a unique opportunity for Syria after five years of continuous destruction.") (AFP, 19/02/2016). Following that, Bashar Assad announced his readiness to accept the ceasefire.
3- These are the calculations of America, Russia, their followers, and cronies... As for the calculations of the sincere people of Syria, they are another matter that will shock the projects of the disbelievers, colonialists, their agents, and those who revolve in their orbit, and will turn their plot back against them, by Allah’s leave:
وَمَا كَيْدُ الْكَافِرِينَ إِلَّا فِي ضَلَالٍ
"And the plot of the disbelievers is not but in error." (QS. Ghafir [40]: 25)
The men of Ash-Sham are not those who gathered at the Intercontinental in Riyadh around money and misguidance and then formed the negotiation body... and they are not the traitors of the Ummah who tilt wherever the dirty money tilts... and they are not the deceivers who speak of negotiating with the regime while saying there is no place for the head of the regime, for he who does not accept a place for him does not negotiate with his regime! And they are not those to whom the secular civil state is dictated and they bow their heads in agreement while claiming to be Islamists! And they are not those who speak of the democracy of "halal and haram" by the ruling of humans instead of the ruling of the Lord of humans, while Allah, the Most Just of Judges, says:
إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ
"Rule is for none but Allah." (QS. Yusuf [12]: 40)
They are not those... rather, they are the lions of Ash-Sham whom the Ummah knows for their truthfulness and sincerity, and whom it knows will not lack goodness until the Day of Resurrection... they are those who shouted and continue to shout from their hearts and mouths, "It is for Allah, it is for Allah"... they are those who want Ash-Sham to be as Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) love it to be:
عُقْرُ دَارِ الْإِسْلَامِ بِالشَّامِ
"The heart of the Abode of Islam is in Ash-Sham." (Narrated by At-Tabarani in Al-Kabir from Salama bin Nufayl)
They are those who reject partition with the same force with which they reject America's secular projects and all projects of the disbelievers and hypocrites... They are the sincere and truthful ones in the land of Ash-Sham, steadfast on the truth they uphold, who realize that falsehood has its turn, but truth has its rounds. They do not compromise on their Deen and their Ummah... they are those who saw with their own eyes that their revolution is indeed a "revealer and exposer," for it revealed the conspirators and exposed the hypocrites, and they all became equal in the open. No one is deceived by them except the heedless, and no one feels safe from their plot except the ignorant... they are those who are reassured that the projects of the disbelievers will meet failure from where they do not expect:
وَسَيَعْلَمُ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا أَيَّ مُنْقَلَبٍ يَنْقَلِبُونَ
"And those who have wronged are going to know to what [kind of] return they will be returned." (QS. Ash-Shu'ara [26]: 227)
Second: The Libyan Issue:
As we mentioned earlier, the issue of Libya differs from that of Syria. In Syria, the conflict is between America and its allies/cronies against the people of Syria, and not between America and another major power as is the case in Libya. In Libya, the conflict is between America and Europe, specifically Britain and France to an extent, then some involvement from Italy. It is essentially an international struggle even if local tools are utilized...
After stating this difference, we will mention more clarification regarding what came in the question about Libya:
1- It is noted that America does not focus on the political solution and its success in Libya, unlike what it does in Syria. Instead, it hints at military intervention and has demanded it in the Security Council, working to obstruct the political solution. It has even begun launching sporadic raids since November last year, claiming to have killed one of its wanted persons. Then, about 20 of its soldiers entered a Libyan base and then left. This was followed by the recent operation carried out by American planes on 19/02/2016, which killed 49 people it claimed belonged to the Islamic State organization, most of them from Tunisia. This is considered the largest operation killing the highest number... and it seems it will continue with such strikes: ("Obama chaired on Thursday, 28/01/2016, a National Security Council meeting dedicated to discussing the situation in Libya, where major Western countries fear that the constitutional vacuum in Libya will form a fertile ground for the growth of the terrorist organization... The White House said in a statement: 'The President issued directives to the National Security team to continue efforts to strengthen the government and support current efforts to combat terrorism in Libya and other countries...'") (Middle East Online, 29/01/2016). Thus, America decided on the policy of launching military raids or military intervention without an international resolution, under the pretext of organization and terrorism...
2- This decision indicates the seriousness of the situation for America in Libya. This is not due to the threats of the "organization" as is being highlighted—as that is taken as a pretext for intervention—but rather there are major powers preventing America from extending its influence in Libya. This is why we see America acting without interest in the final agreement signed in Skhirat, Morocco, on 17/12/2015, and it does not focus on its implementation. Most of its talk is about military intervention in Libya against what it calls terrorism. If this agreement were in its favor, it would have been keen to implement it with all its power... All this came after it was unable, through its agent Haftar since 2014, to control and extend its influence in Libya and put the regime in its hands. Therefore, it began to intervene directly without obtaining an international resolution from the Security Council, where Britain blocked the issuance of a resolution authorizing military intervention in Libya. Therefore, the implementation of the political solution will remain obstructed.
3- America pretends to accept the political agreement in Skhirat while working to delay its implementation. We can confirm this through the statement of John Brennan, Director of the CIA, on 25/02/2016, where he said: ("The United States is implementing a two-track policy on the ground in Libya, in one of which it exerts diplomatic efforts to bring the two rival governments together, while launching counter-terrorism operations against the Islamic State whose danger is growing.") (AFP, 25/02/2016). Its Secretary of State John Kerry said: ("We worked very hard in the past months in particular to form a government in Tripoli. If they cannot agree, Libya will become a failed state.") (Reuters, 24/02/2016). He claims he worked hard to form the government! That is, by America's standards, otherwise it will thwart it. Since the Skhirat government was not like that, it worked to obstruct its formation on flimsy pretexts through its agents in the Tobruk parliament when they said they rejected forming it from 32 ministers. The Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj had gone to Egypt on 22/01/2016 and met its ruler Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in a visit that lasted 6 days. Sarraj tried to appease America's agents, so at the end of his visit, he announced his readiness to reduce the number of ministers. After Sarraj left Cairo, Haftar landed there to review the results and receive instructions on what he should do, and to secure more support for him. This means that America is not satisfied with the formation of the government because its formation did not come as it wants... Sarraj reduced the number of government members, forming it from 18 ministers, and then presented it to the Tobruk parliament on 23/02/2016, but it was rejected. Even an armed gang, described as unknown, attacked members of the parliament coming to vote and worked to prevent them from entering, and the quorum was not met, as only 89 out of 200 members attended. The Speaker of the Parliament then adjourned the session. So America, through its gangs and the deputies belonging to it, is working on the obstruction...
4- The reason for this obstruction is that the majority of the political class in Libya is from the remnants of Gaddafi, i.e., European-loyal... and any ministerial formation will be of this size, as it is in the new ministry. America relies on Haftar and a group of military officers around him and was hoping he would establish bases for himself with a new political class that participates with the lion's share in government and dominates it. However, until now he has not been able to, and not all his military actions are successful, but rather stumbling. Therefore, America is obstructing the political solution as much as possible through military intervention by itself, Haftar, and its followers, until it can ensure a rule in which it has the lion's share... military intervention is its means to establish its political influence in Libya, and it seems it will not stop until it achieves its goal.
5- This is unlike Europe, which is working for the success of the agreement, the formation of the government, and its approval because it still controls the political class. The evidence for this is plenty. French President Hollande met with Britain's agent, King Mohammed VI of Morocco, in France on 17/02/2016, and they discussed the situation in Libya and announced they urge the Libyan parliament to grant confidence to the government of national accord headed by Sarraj. British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond visited Algeria and met with its Foreign Minister Ramtane Lamamra on 19/02/2016 and stressed there that ("Military intervention in Libya does not represent the most appropriate solution to settle the crisis witnessed by the country, and called for a political solution." The Algerian minister supported his British counterpart's statement and said: "We do not believe that a military intervention is the solution to settle the crisis in Libya. All efforts made aim to enable Libya to install a national unity government that will be effective in its fight against terrorism...") (Al-Khabar Algerian, 19/02/2016). Britain, backed by France, also uses its regional powers to make the political process succeed and block the military intervention promoted by America...
As for the statements heard about military actions from some European countries, they are for precaution so that the arena is not left solely to America if no option remains but intervention. Media outlets reported that Britain sent a military force to Libya; the Africa Gate reported on 12/01/2016, quoting the British Socialist Worker website, that ("The Conservative government sent 1000 British soldiers to Libya to defend the oil fields that became threatened with the progress of the Daesh organization's forces. Also, a Royal Navy destroyer headed to the North African coast, while the Air Force was asked to prepare for airstrikes against targets in Libya"). Le Monde newspaper published on 24/02/2016 that ("Special forces units are participating in a secret war against Islamic State militants in Libya"), meaning France is preparing to intervene when necessary, but secretly, and sending special forces with Britain to prevent America's military exclusivity there. France did not want to expose this but kept it secret because it does not want to make military intervention something natural and legitimate in Libya currently, as it works with Britain to implement the political agreement and the formation and support of the government... Even when America was trying to embarrass Europe regarding military intervention by announcing European interventions here and there, Europe was quick to deny those statements... ("Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi denied Sunday Italy's intention to send about 5,000 soldiers to Libya, saying conditions are not suitable for military intervention in the former Italian colony. Renzi said during a television talk show: 'As long as I am Prime Minister, Italy will not go to Libya to invade it with five thousand men.' He added, 'If there is a need for intervention, Italy will not back down. But this is not the situation today. The idea of sending five thousand soldiers is not on the table.' Renzi was responding to the US Ambassador to Italy John Phillips, who told the Corriere della Sera newspaper Friday that Rome might send up to five thousand soldiers"). (Source: Agencies, Russia Today, 07/03/2016)... ("Italy said that before deploying these soldiers, a formal request must be obtained from the Libyan government after it gains the confidence of the parliament.") (Al Arabiya, 08/03/2016), which is an allusion to America's intervention without waiting for a resolution from the Security Council or a legitimate government in Libya.
This means things will not stabilize soon in Libya, and it is not expected that a government of significance will arise in Libya that can maintain security or create stability. The most that can exist is a third government that has no power, especially since America was downplaying the importance of any new government that arises: ("...experts warned that the signing by members of the Tripoli and Tobruk parliaments of an agreement to form a national unity government will result in nothing but a third government in the country, which exacerbates the state of fragmentation and chaos... A report by the Soufan Group, a US research center based in New York, stated that 'if a national unity government is formed, it is likely to face rejection from the factions belonging to the two conflicting governments to accept its legitimacy,' and the report warned that 'the nascent government will likely fight a battle before the ink has dried' on the signing of its formation agreement, according to the British Guardian newspaper, yesterday...") (Al-Shorouk: 19/12/2015). Thus, even if it is formed, it will be no more than a warrior's rest before resuming later. It appears that America will not stop this time from working until it has a primary role in Libya, because for the first time it has agents in this form, and it found an opportunity to intervene under the pretext of fighting the Daesh organization.
Accordingly, there will be no stability in Libya until the hands of these colonialist countries are cut off from intervention. The most important thing is to topple their cheap local tools, who are loyal to this country or that, and who are bought and sold to prepare for its intervention, even serving it in it and fighting for it by proxy! The sincere, aware people must carry out serious work to foil all types of foreign intervention, expel the colonialists from the country—whether Europeans or Americans—reject and topple all their solutions and projects and their agents, and work to take the reins of power and establish the rule of Allah on His earth... We do not lack goodness in the people of Libya, the land of the memorizers of the Noble Qur’an, for therein are sincere, truthful men who can, by Allah’s leave, frustrate the projects of those who hate Islam and its people. Allah, the All-Powerful, the All-Mighty, is the supporter of those who support Him:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللَّهَ يَنْصُرْكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتْ أَقْدَامَكُمْ * وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَتَعْسًا لَهُمْ وَأَضَلَّ أَعْمَالَهُم
"O you who have believed, if you support Allah, He will support you and plant firmly your feet. But those who disbelieve - for them is misery, and He will waste their deeds." (QS. Muhammad [47]: 7-8)