You are here

US wants Assad out for not backing Qatari pipeline: Kennedy

Washington’s intention to overthrow Syria's legitimate and democratically-elected President Bashar al-Assad results from his refusal to back a Qatari gas pipeline project, an attorney says. Article first published by Iranian Press TV at

According to an article published by Politico on Thursday, American attorney and nephew of US President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., wrote that the US decided to topple Assad after he declined to back a gas pipeline project of the Qatari government.  Article first published by Iranian Press TV at

The project was aimed at building a gas link from Qatar through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey to Europe.

The $10 billion pipeline project first surfaced in 2000 and the CIA went ahead with the plan until nine years later Assad announced that he would not support the pipeline initiative, a move that could grant Qatar direct access to European energy markets via terminals in Turkey.

“Soon after that the CIA began funding opposition groups in Syria," said Kennedy.

“If completed, the project would have had major geopolitical implications. Ankara would have profited from rich transit fees. The project would have also given the Sunni kingdoms of the Persian Gulf decisive domination of world natural gas markets and strengthen Qatar, America's closest ally in the Arab world," he noted.

Kennedy added that the pipeline would have also strengthened Saudi Arabia by giving the kingdom additional leverage against Iran.

In a separate interview with Sputnik, Kennedy said, “If we study the history of America’s relation with Mideast and looking at the US’ violent intervention in Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt over time and the extraordinary and astonishing thing is the solid record of the cataclysmic failure every time we venture there in violent fashion. Most Americans are completely unaware of us attempting to overthrow the democratically elected government in Syria, contrary to our own state department policy and contrary to American values.”

Since March 2011, the United States and its regional allies, in particular Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, have been conducting a proxy war against Syria. The years-long conflict has left somewhere between 270,000 to 470,000 Syrians dead and half of the country’s population displaced.

Read comments on the original article here:


Russia currently supplies Europe with a quarter of the gas it uses for heating, cooking, fuel and other activities. 80 per cent of the gas that Russian state-controlled company Gazprom produces is sold to Europe, so maintaining this crucial market is very important. Russia uses its power over gas as political leverage and has a history of cutting off supply to countries during conflicts. The United States would prefer Russia to have less influence in Europe. The US also wants to use its own natural gas supply, recently developed through fracking, to undercut Russian supply. A gas field located 3000 metres below the floor of the Persian Gulf is the largest natural gas field in the world. The Arab Gas Pipeline, was originally planned to continue traveling from Syria into Turkey. From there, it can be piped into Europe.

President Bashar al Assad refused to give permission for the pipeline to go through his territory.

The roots of the war in Syria is centered in the development, supply and control of oil and natural gas reserves in Middle Eastern countries and the pipelines needed to send them primarily to Europe. It's not about a humanitarian cause, or the promotion of democracy - but simply the demand for diminishing natural resources. Meddling in Syria came about immediately on the heels of discussions of an Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline that was to be built between 2014 and 2016 from Iran’s giant South Pars field through Iraq and Syria.

Hi Population Overshoot,

I think the circumstances involved in any cutting off of fuel by Russia should be included in any statements. According to my recollection, Russia has piped fuel to Ukraine for a long time but Ukraine has a history of paying late or not at all. During the war between East Ukraine and Kiev, Ukraine continued to default on payments and Russia finally cut her off, in view of hostilities. I think that Ukraine has since blocked the downstream supply of water to Ukraine. The United States has imposed sanctions to prevent Iraq from exploiting or selling its own oil and forced privatisation of publicly owned oil production there. After the fall of the Soviet Union, various neocons from the West aligned with Russian oligarchs to pillage Russian oil and gas. Putin eventually got these resources back into public ownership and the oligarchs fled. This is, I think, why Putin suddenly became so unpopular with the US.

When the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee holds their annual convention in Washington DC this March, who are they gonna endorse for the Democratic presidential nominee? Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish -- or Hillary Clinton, the ultimate war hawk who will support anything that Israeli neo-colonialists decide to do with regard to making "Greater Israel" a reality?

Will AIPAC choose to support the Jewish race and/or religion by going with Sanders, the ultimate Jewish grandpa?

Or will AIPAC go with neo-colonialism and choose Hillary Clinton, the goy who will obviously support attacking Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Lebanon, Jordan, the Gulf States, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq (again) and anything else that might get in the way of creating the "Greater Israel" neo-colonialists' wet dream -- even if the USA gets in the way?

This is gonna be very interesting to see how AIPAC's choice turns out.

I'll bet you a bagel that they'll choose Clinton.

First published at

The cards are stacked in Hillarys favour. She has the establishment behind her and many Republicans. Trumps deviation from the Republicans standard whoring to the donor class has disgusted the Conservatives who make their living and base their image on selling out America.

A significant part of the Republican party would prefer to hand victory to Hillary than see Trump win. It is this undermining of Trump and self-destruction which will end up giving Hillary victory, not Hillarys non existent virtues.

As to sucking up to AIPAC, every candidate has to express loyalty to Israel. It's something that everyone on Capital Hill knows, but cannot say, that you will go nowhere in politics without the right attitude towards Israel.

Sanders will lose out because he is appealing to the progressives, but the demographics of the Democratic voters work against Sanders. In short, the progressives are pinning their hopes on someone who us running for a party where many of its supporters vote for who they are told to vote for. Sanders doesn't have the black vote, so white progressives are in a bind because their appeal to minorities is ironically derailing their chance at a better candidate.

This election is interesting, because the line isn't between Democrat and Republican, but between Establishment and anti-Establishment (Rebellion). Trump is the rebellious faction of the Conservatives, and Sanders the rebellious side of the Left. Trump and Sanders share some common ground on their populist agenda, and dare I say it, share demographics. Quite a few Sanders voters may have Trump as their number two option, and I've heard of Trump supporters who put Sanders second.

This election, and ones of the future will be decided more and more on demographics and rebellion, not "left/right" divides.

by Hazem Sabbagh. Previously published (26/9/16) on the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA).

Kiev, SANA – The Syrian community in Ukraine, in cooperation with the Ukrainian-Syrian Friendship Association, organized a stand in Kiev to express solidarity with Syria in its war against terrorism.

Head of the Syrian-Ukrainian Friendship Association Anatoly Domanski asserted that honest Ukrainians support Syria in its battle against terrorism, calling on the international community to fight terrorist organizations across the world.

In turn, head of the Syrian Community League branch Imad Zaza voiced rejection of all forms of division and fragmentation, stressing commitment to Syria’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Hazem Sabbagh