【Shi Hai Review】Those unreliable "American reports" in history

Source: Global Times

Editor's note: Recently, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons issued a report accusing the Syrian government of using chemical weapons against opposition forces in its territory, causing a large number of civilian casualties. The report has aroused the resolute opposition of the Syrian government, and has also triggered widespread debate and doubts in the international community, believing that the report is influenced by the United States. In fact, whether it is the chemical weapons incident surrounding Syria, the so-called "weapons of mass destruction" mystery of the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq, or even the historical US invasion of many small countries in Central America, many "reliable" reports and memoranda on which it is based have been proved unreliable by history.

Air strikes on Syria, US "key evidence" was slapped in the face

Since 2017, the US military has launched several air strikes against Syria. The U.S. says the fight against Syria is aimed at stopping the misuse of chemical weapons. However, multiple reports of the U.S. attacks on Syria's use of chemical weapons have been questioned by some U.S. scientists and other professionals as unreliable.

On April 6, 2017, a U.S. warship in the eastern Mediterranean launched cruise missiles at the Shairat military airport in central Syria's Homs province, killing many Syrian military and civilians, marking the first time the United States has publicly taken military action against Syrian government forces. The U.S. said the airstrike was a counterattack to the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons in its territory. On April 4, 2017, a suspected chemical weapons attack in the town of Hansheikhun in southern Idlib province in Syria reportedly killed more than 80 civilians. The Syrian opposition and the West blame the Syrian government forces for the attack, which was launched from the Shairat military airport, which was targeted at the Syrian military's ability to launch chemical weapons.

In fact, the US military launched the air strike based on the Syrian opposition's complaints and some on-site media reports, as well as previous US reports on Syria's possession of chemical weapons. The investigation report by the International Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which is responsible, on suspicion and blame on the Syrian government or for the chemical weapons attack in Hansheikhun, came out more than two months later, on June 29. In other words, when the United States launched its air strikes in April, it was mainly based on consistent suspicion and subjective judgment, and there was no authoritative report from the United Nations agency.

There are many reports and reports against the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons in its own fight against the opposition, some from the Syrian opposition, some from the media of both sides, even from the self-media, and the more "authoritative" reports from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the US government. On August 30, 2013, the White House Press Office released a report entitled "Assessment of the Syrian Government's Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013." The report analyzes and judges the background, preparations and attack process, accusing the Syrian government of being responsible for the chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of Damascus that day, which caused a large number of civilian casualties. However, the report also suggests that some information is not made public to protect the security of sources. On 29 June 2017, the OPCW released its report entitled "Fact-finding report on the April 2017 incident in the Syrian town of Hansheijun". Similar reports, as have been accepted by the United States and its Western allies, both report believe that Syrian government forces carried out chemical weapons attacks.

But this conclusion led by the United States has caused many doubts, including scientists from the United States. In 2019 and 2020, the prestigious academic journals Science and the Journal of International Law Medicine and Medicine published an academic paper with the main authors of several professors from universities such as Princeton University and Texas A&M University. According to the article, scientists have studied some key evidence in the relevant reports of the United States and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, using 3D image analysis, computer modeling and other scientific methods. Finally, the scientists concluded that a study of a crater used as key evidence in the 2017 incident in Hansheikhun found that the available evidence was insufficient to support the conclusion of the U.S. government and relevant international organizations that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack. What is more, studies have shown that individual evidence against the Syrian government is suspected of being falsified.

As soon as the news came out, international public opinion was in an uproar, but this article and related news were intentionally or unintentionally ignored by the Western mainstream media. Another authoritative American journal affiliated with Princeton University, Science and Global Security, was about to publish this article, but it was blocked by many forces and finally forced to abandon the publication.

It is also reported that some key evidence accepted by the reports of the United States and the West and some international organizations is alleged to have the shadow of the "White Helmets" behind them. The White Helmets, whose full name is the Syrian Civil Defence Organization, is a civilian relief organization founded in early 2013 mainly composed of volunteers and operating mainly in the Syrian opposition-occupied areas. Its members often wear white helmets during rescue operations. Some of the evidence in recent years about chemical weapons attacks in Syria comes from the group. However, many institutions believe that the White Helmets are suspected of posing in many rescue activities, and from the source of their funding, Western countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands are their main funders.

The photos and videos provided by the White Helmets have from time to time become material for Western media to report on the Syrian conflict, and are often accepted by the investigation reports of the United States and relevant international organizations, and then become an excuse for Western countries to intervene in Syrian affairs. The United States often refuses to release direct evidence of "the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons" on the grounds of protecting information sources, which also makes international public opinion unconvincing.

Some agencies suspect that the investigative reports of the United States and some international organizations are in fact controlled by the U.S. government and its intelligence services. For example, a US think tank has pointed out that the essence of the Syrian conflict is a proxy war waged by the United States and its allies, with the real aim of seeking to restore their dominance in the region. The Institute also stressed in particular that after the farce of the United States concocted Iraq's so-called "weapons of mass destruction", people should no longer trust Western intelligence and the so-called evidence in their investigative reports.

The website of National Public Radio also published an article introducing a book about the Syrian conflict written by Jobi Warwick, a senior reporter for the Washington Post. In the book, Jobbie Warwick mentions a detail. In 2013, the United Nations recruited a retired professor from Sweden to lead a team into Syria to conduct field investigations on chemical weapons. However, due to the team's cautious attitude and "low efficiency", their presence once became an obstacle to the United States' "hands-on" in Syria. To this end, then-US President Barack Obama even directly approached then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to try to push the UN to withdraw the professor and his team from Syria as soon as possible. With this detail foreshadowed, one can understand the later accusations made by Syrian officials that the reports of relevant international organizations on Syria's chemical weapons were influenced by the United States.

Controlling small Latin American countries, the US report was issued as "needed"

For many years, in order to ensure that its interests are not violated, the United States has always regarded Central America and the Caribbean as its own backyard, and has achieved control over many countries in the region by installing puppet regimes. Over the years, the United States has either directly sent troops or sent mercenaries to carry out aggression against Panama, Guatemala, El Salvador, Dominica and other countries in order to eliminate dissidents and cultivate "qualified" spokespersons. In order to "legitimize" these acts of aggression and interference in the internal affairs of other countries, some of the US investigation reports and memorandums of intelligence agencies against these countries are purposefully selective, and the "true" or "false" reports of the relevant reports are based solely on the interests of the United States.

The experience of Noriega, the former head of Government of Panama and former commander-in-chief of the National Defence Force, is a good example of this. After graduating from university, Noriega went to Peru to study military engineering and was developed by the CIA as an intelligence officer. Because of his outstanding performance, Noriega, who joined the Panamanian army, climbed to the leadership position of the National Guard. In 1983, with the covert support of the United States, Noriega staged a military coup d'état, became the de facto leader of Panama, imposed a military dictatorship, and later became president.

After taking office, Noriega continued to provide valuable intelligence to the CIA on the one hand, and obeyed the United States on the other hand. Noriega reportedly collaborated with Colombian drug cartels for a long time, disguising staggering quantities of drugs as goods transiting through Panama and then shipping them to the United States for sale for huge profits. According to declassified U.S. files, Noriega's political enemies had submitted an investigative report to the United States, detailing Noriega's involvement in drug trafficking and accusing Noriega of involvement in murder. However, compared with the strategic interests of the United States in Panama and in Central America, Noriega's crimes are not "major contradictions". What's more, the U.S. government covered Noriega's crimes. In 1987, U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meath also blocked the U.S. Department of Justice's investigation into Noriega's criminal activities. That same year, a resolution of the US Senate condemning Noriega was opposed by the State Department's Central American and Panamanian affairs officials...

However, when Noriega tried to get rid of American control and oppose the continued control of the Panama Canal by the United States, touching on the "core interests" of the United States, the situation changed abruptly. In 1988, the American organization Watch of the Americas released a human rights report denouncing the Noriega government for trampling on democracy and describing the tragic life of the Panamanian people under Noriega's rule. In the same year, the U.S. Department of Justice formally indicted Noriega on charges of "drug smuggling and trafficking" and asked the government to send troops to arrest him. On December 20, 1989, under the pretext of protecting the lives and property of American nationals, the United States launched a military operation called "Just Cause" (pictured), sending 24,000 US troops to launch a surprise attack on Panama, destroying the main force of the Panamanian Defense Forces in just over 10 hours and completely controlling the country. On January 3, 1990, Noriega was escorted to the United States for trial and later sentenced to prison.

Noriega's experience shows that as long as it serves the strategic goals of the United States and the national interest, real reports can be deliberately ignored and real crimes can be lightly ignored. As long as "necessary", new reports can be "issued" at any time as a reason for interfering in the internal affairs of other countries or even sending troops to invade.

Similarly, the experience of Guatemala, another Central American country, is similar. In 1944, the bourgeois-democratic revolution broke out in Guatemala, overthrowing the traditional feudal comprador military dictatorship in Latin America and establishing a national bourgeois government. In the years that followed, President Arévalo and his successor, President Árbenz, introduced a series of reforms to Guatemala, which gradually embarked on the path of economic development. However, such a Guatemala is not in the interests of the United States and its monopoly capital. In 1952, the CIA issued a report on the situation in Guatemala, which ignored a series of achievements in Guatemala and the improvement of the living standards of the Guatemalan people, but blindly emphasized, exaggerated and even fabricated facts to publicize that the infiltration of the Communist Party in the region had seriously threatened the interests of the United States. In 1954, the CIA orchestrated a coup d'état in Guatemala and proped up a new pro-American regime to power.

In this regard, Julio Godoy, a reporter for Guatemala's "Time Weekly", wrote: As long as the Americans do not change their strategy towards the region, there is no room for truth and hope. (Zhang Jiwen, Mu Ru)