By Qamar Bashir
The USA, in recent history, has committed grave strategic blunders and, interestingly,
managed to make others pay for these mistakes while cleverly insulating itself from the
consequences. In the wars against Iraq and Libya, the USA, often with its allies coerced
into joining under false pretexts, fabricated reasons, and manufactured evidence of
weapons of mass destruction, invaded Iraq. This invasion destroyed the country, killed
hundreds of thousands of people, and reduced what was once one of the richest and
fastest-developing nations in the Middle East to rubble.
Not satisfied with the devastation in Iraq, the USA turned its attention to Libya,
orchestrating the overthrow and eventual killing of Muammar Gaddafi. Gaddafi had kept
Libya's society, composed of many warring and independent tribes, united and stable.
Under his leadership, Libya prospered, and its people enjoyed a relatively high standard
of living. Moreover, the country provided employment to thousands of workers from
other nations to support its rapid development. The removal of Gaddafi plunged Libya
into chaos, destabilizing the region and unleashing a wave of violence and tribal conflicts
that persist to this day.
Like Iraq, Libya was reduced to rubble, and the entire Middle East was destabilized.
Poverty became rampant, and in search of better lives, people began migrating to Europe
on unsafe, overcrowded boats. Many of these boats sank in the middle of the sea, killing
their passengers, while the few that reached European shores created a refugee crisis in
multiple European countries. Meanwhile, the USA, far beyond the reach of these small
boats, remained largely unaffected by the consequences of this crisis.
Similarly, the predatory nature of the USA led to the so-called conquest of Afghanistan,
where it remained for over a decade before suffering a humiliating retreat. This
withdrawal left behind all Afghans who had sided with the USA in grave danger.
Afghanistan was plunged into the darkness of the dark ages, destabilizing the entire
region. Tons of lethal weapons were left behind, falling into the hands of the Taliban,
insurgent groups, and factions like TLP, which are now destabilizing the social fabric of
Pakistan and other countries in the region. Meanwhile, the USA and its European allies
remained largely insulated from the aftermath of their humiliating defeat in Afghanistan.
While the USA and its allies in Europe and the Middle East were gleefully celebrating
the success of Anti Assad Militias their own creation, they perhaps did not anticipate that
the leaders of the militias, after conquering Syria, would announce their next target: the
liberation of Al-Quds (Jerusalem), avenging the deaths of hundreds of thousands of
civilians in Gaza and elsewhere, and pledging not to rest until Israel is reduced to a
position where it has no ability to impose its hegemony in the region.
These statements are likely giving sleepless nights to Middle Eastern countries like Saudi
Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Turkey. They must also be deeply concerning to
Israeli leadership and to leaders in the USA, who likely never imagined that the very
forces they helped raise—with their sweat, blood, and hard-earned money—to insulate
Israel from the Syrian threat under Assad, would turn their guns with lightning speed
toward Israel. This turn of events is the very outcome the USA and its allies sought to
avoid when they intervened to remove Assad, who was supported by Russia and Iran.
While building the anti-Assad militias, the USA and its allies, in their haste, empowered
various groups with money and weapons, overlooking their deeply entrenched and
divergent ideologies and objectives. The militias were led by figures with different goals:
Riad al-Asaad and Salim Idris of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) advocated for a secular,
democratic Syria; Abu Mohammad al-Julani of Jabhat al-Nusra, aligned with al-Qaeda,
aimed to establish an Islamic state; Zahran Alloush of Jaish al-Islam sought a Sunni
Islamic government; and Hassan Aboud of Ahrar al-Sham pursued an Islamic state
under Sharia law. Leaders like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of ISIS aimed for a global
caliphate. Although their common goal was to overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s Alawite-
dominated regime, their ideological divides—ranging from secular democracy to hardline
Islamism—led to fragmentation and competition, complicating their ability to present a
united front.
The anti-Assad militias, after conquering Syria, have redirected their focus toward
attacking Israel to avenge Palestinian casualties in Gaza and “liberate” Jerusalem (Al-
Quds). This would, like Afghanistan, Iraq and Lybia, would create a significant security
and geopolitical crisis. Israel would face an unprecedented threat from a coalition of
Islamist forces operating close to its borders, particularly in the Golan Heights. Such
attacks would likely escalate into a broader regional conflict, potentially drawing in
actors like Hezbollah from Lebanon and Iran, further destabilizing the region. For Israel,
this would necessitate a robust military response, including preemptive strikes and
heightened defense measures, leading to a protracted and destructive confrontation.
For the United States, the scenario would highlight the blowback of supporting anti-
Assad factions during the Syrian Civil War. Having indirectly empowered groups now
attacking its closest ally, U.S. credibility and regional strategy would come under severe
scrutiny. The U.S. would face pressure to provide military and diplomatic support to
Israel, entangling itself further in Middle Eastern conflicts. This could strain relations
with Arab allies, many of whom might face domestic unrest as public sentiment in their
countries sympathizes with actions against Israel, challenging their governments’ ties
with the U.S. and Israel.
Regionally, the conflict could destabilize Arab states that have normalized relations with
Israel, such as the UAE, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, putting agreements like the Abraham
Accords at risk. Iran, already an opponent of Israel, might exploit the situation to bolster
its influence by aligning with militias or intensifying its rhetoric of resistance. The
ensuing instability could disrupt global oil supplies, escalate terrorist recruitment
worldwide, and embolden extremist movements. Ultimately, this scenario would deepen
divisions between pro- and anti-Western factions, jeopardizing regional and global peace.
The history of mankind, which we meticulously document for various purposes, serves as
a tool for learning and avoiding the strategic, tactical, and ideological errors that have led
to the destruction of societies and civilizations. Yet, our own recent history suggests that
even nations at the apex of civilization fail to learn from their past mistakes. Despite the
lessons of history, these uncalculated blunders continue to wreak havoc on societies and
communities worldwide, leaving a trail of chaos and suffering that may persist for
generations to come.
