Israeli Attack on Syria:
Stop the drive to war

May 6, 2013

The recent Israeli attacks on Syrian territory are designed to further destabilize the situation in the area and push us closer to a larger regional war. They are illegal under international law and must be condemned.

For the last two years NATO and its allies have been attempting to control the Syrian opposition by funneling weapons to the rebels through the gulf states, deploying missile batteries in Turkey and by sending U.S. Special forces to the Syrian/Jordanian border.

This Israeli attack signals a dramatic escalation in that intervention. The timing of the strikes suggest that Israel is attempting to stoke the conflict to provide justification for a larger NATO led military campaign.

If the government of Bashar Al Assad were to gain ground on the opposition forces, as appeared to be possible as recently last week, it would pose a serious challenge for NATO countries hoping to use the conflict in Syria to weaken other regional players, especially, Hezbollah in Lebanon and the government of Iran.

And so the west is ramping up the rhetoric. Recently, U.S. intelligence officials stated that they had "some degree of varying confidence" that the Syrian state was using sarin gas on opponents. That absurd statement was hardly the smoking gun that NATO wanted to justify the intervention. A leading UN investigator now says that the sarin may have been used by the opposition forces rather than the Syrian government.

All these factors point towards a larger – if not entirely coherent - drive to war with Syria. Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird suggested that Canada is talking to its allies about a possible attack. His press secretary Rick Roth subsequently "clarified" Baird's statement and said that Canada isn't contemplating support for a military attack on Syria.

But Canadians know what the government says, and what it does, in the realm of military intervention, are often two very different things. Most recently, they told Canadians no troops would be sent to support the French led mission in Mali, but deployed Canadian Special Forces within a week. In 2008 and in 2010, they extended the mission in Afghanistan after promises that they would not do so.

Any NATO attack on Syria would result in a much larger war throughout the Middle East and must be opposed. As we see in places like Libya and Afghanistan, NATO intervention have a tendency to leave a trail of dead bodies and corrupt governments.

All Canadians concerned about peace need to be on the alert for any further escalation and should be prepared for action should the Harper government decide to intervene in this conflict.

Canada and NATO: Stay out of Syria

December 2012

There is growing evidence that NATO and its allies will attempt to intervene in Syria to topple the government of Bashar Al-Assad. During the recent "Friends of Syria" meeting in Morocco, the US and more than 100 countries officially recognized the Syrian National Coalition as the country's legitimate opposition, a move that may foreshadow a military attack.

While Canada has not officially endorsed an intervention, there are reports that Canadian military forces are ready to deploy, including the Joint Incident Response Unit and the Disaster Assistance Response Team. With Canadian warships still patrolling the Mediterranean, Canada could very likely join a naval campaign.

NATO countries are desperate to contain and control the Syrian opposition, especially as rebel forces gain new ground. Western governments want to ensure that a post-Assad Syria will be compliant, not independent. The move to form a new coalition is just the latest attempt to increase the West's hold on opposition forces and influence their trajectory.

This development follows unsubstantiated claims that Syria is considering using chemical weapons against the opposition, but there is no reliable evidence that this could happen. Only "unnamed intelligence sources" in the US government have made the suggestion. These are the same sources that lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

In addition, these claims make no sense militarily. If Syria deployed chemical weapons, it would guarantee foreign intervention and signal the end of Assad's government – an outcome it is trying to avoid, not accelerate.

The US and its allies are currently trying to justify an attack, not because they care about the people of Syria, but because they want to sever ties between the Syrian government and other countries and groups that oppose US and Israeli policies. Syria is seen as a key supporter of resistance movements in Lebanon and an ally of Iran. In this light, any intervention is Syria could lead to a military attack on Iran.

A recent CTV poll found that 76 per cent of Canadians oppose intervention in Syria. After more than a decade of war in Afghanistan, the Canadian public is not prepared to support another invasion. Remember that Bush's "axis of evil" included Syria and Iran, but US troops got bogged down in Iraq, and were unable to spread the war. US interference in Syria today is an attempt to finish what Bush started.

The Canadian Peace Alliance condemns this interference, which is already creating instability and spreading violence throughout the region. Therefore, we call on the Canadian government to respect the will of Canadians, and to refrain from any interference in the lives of the Syrian people, whether military, political or economic.

Sign up for CPA Action Alerts!
E-mail cpa@web.ca or follow us on