On October 26, former Qatar Prime Minister Hamad Bin Jassim said during an interview to the Qatari national TV that Doha supported the Syrian opposition armed groups and even terrorists like the al-Nusra Front (the local al-Qaeda branch) in Syria in coordination with Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the US.
“Anything [weapons] that was sent [to Syria] would go through Turkey and was coordinated with the US, and the distribution of anything was via US forces. Turkey, we and our Saudi brothers… There could be a mistake and support was given to a fiction [al-Nusra Front], but not ISIS. They are exaggerating… Maybe there was a relation with the al-Nusra Front. Maybe I don’t know about this. But I can say that even if this was the case, it was decided that the al-Nusra Front was not acceptable. The support for it stopped,” Bin Jassim said.
Bin Jassim went on and revealed that Saudi Arabia changed its position on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad recently. According to Bin Jassim, Saudi Arabia now wants Assad to stay in power.
The former Qatari prime minister stressed that even Qatar does not has any problems with Assad now. He even described the Syrian president as a “former friend”.
“You [Saudi Arabia] are now saying keep Bashar, ok let him stay we don’t have any problem, We have no quarrel with him. He was a friend of us … But you [Saudi Arabia] were in the same trench with us, if you changed your mind [About Bashar] tell us so. We will change our attitude too… I’m not against anyone changing his mind when he finds out that he was mistaken. But he should tell his partner that he is changing his mind because the current situation doesn’t work anymore. Now Bashar works or this or that” Bin Jassim added.
Bin Jassim’s statement confirms that the Syrian issue was one the main causes of the Saudi–Qatari crisis that broke out on June 5. Due to this, the crisis will not likely end before all the Arabian Gulf countries agree on a wide range of issues, including the Syrian issue.
During the interview, Bin Jassim also said that “we [Arabian Gulf countries] fought over the prey [Syria], unlit the prey run away, and we are still fighting”. Syrian pro-government and opposition activists condemned Bin Jassim’s statement and blamed him for calling Syria a “prey”.
This is just BS. Ones you see things like that published then you know they are trying to confuse the people.
What all these entities did was the opposite. They are all masking this just to not causing uprising against the saudis and avoid further wars.
Is this the latest US fantasy narrative Mountains?
You’re a delusional fucking idiot… “The saudis supported Assad all the way.” dafuq??????????
Where have you been?
Okay Mountain, you are a bot right? This post is absolutely in outer space. It is completely without consciousness and that is not human. The Saudis were screaming for him to go and it was plain as day. Even the US admitted it was organizing the supply live for the ‘rebels’. Normally your posts offer a counter perspective and I do appreciate that. But, …….. this last one is nuts man, unless one is an aspiring PR man.
Pay him no mind everybody. Something is not right here.
Just to remind you – you are commenting the article in which former Qatari prime minister openly admits that them, Turks, Saudis, and Americans financed terrorists in Syria resulting in half a million dead Syrians. From your conclusion that “they have all been supporting Assad”, I can only conclude that you are either delusional, or you are f***ing with all other commentators (trolling). I mean your comments are not even worth a reply, but it is amazing to me that you can put the comment like yours, below this article.
Yep, it is far beyond incredible.
“until the prey run away,” the Gulf state Arabs cannot hide their deviousness, they smile and kiss you on the cheek but they slip up every now and again. The Iranians never talk like this because they don’t think in terms of how to trick you.
Make no mistake the The Gulf arab monarchy’s had alot on the line and had to make the right call from their own positions and POV. Assad was there guy and even above that. Their life-line.
They don’t view anyone as threat except Religious uprising on local base..
That is what they mostly fear and see it as nightmare. They love to hold things on status quo and extend their monarchy rulership.
They are very hard to pin-point because they want to be viewed different but fortunately things are clearing up
My god, how do you do that?
It’s amazing how everything is either upside-down or inside-out in your views.
This is just basic analysis. You need to understand who benefits from what in order to understand the whole picture.
What do these regimes fear? It’s definitely not an Invasion because they are well protected but it’s an uprising from within.
So feeding the uprising against Assad would have meant uprising against them hence why they without a doubt sided with Assad.
You don’t need to be scientist to understand this simple fact
It’s even more amazing that you’re able to reach a wrong conclusion through a correct but simplistic analyze.
I’m really curious to know how do you do that. Would you help me out?
Let’s take it step by step, starting from the basics, shall we?
1- Do you agree/disagree that Saudi Arabia spreads Wahhabism through it’s vast network of religious schools/institutions/Madrasas?
2- Do you agree/disagree that the ideology of groups like AQ and ISIS is based on Wahhabism?
3- Do you agree/disagree that AQ and ISIS are terror groups?
4- Do you agree/disagree that Syrian government is secular?
5- Do you agree/disagree that AQ and ISIS are fighting Syrian government?
5A- If you agree on 5, Do you agree/disagree that Iran and Hezbollah (not talking about Russia yet) are helping the Syrian government against such groups?
5B- If you disagree on 5, what are those groups doing in Syria in your opinion?
6- Do you agree/disagree that the US is closely involved in the policies of the Saudi Arabia? By that, I mean the Saudis coordinate their foreign policies with the US before implementing them.
We’d continue if you feel like clearing these questions. Much obliged.
Very good it made me laugh. It is also spot on.
What are you smoking dude, give me some :D
Iranians are not Arabs but Persians. Big difference.
A very big difference indeed; few people realise this unfortunately.
” and the distribution of anything was via US forces ”
Well I never, you could knock me over with a feather. Who would ever have thought that the US would be directly supporting UN designated terrorist organisations and their Fellow Travellers in Death and Destruction ?
knowing how they used to support the Taleban, and so on, this is normal international business for them…
I think we supported the mujahedin but never the Taliban? Am I wrong?
You can give them many different names :) but those are very same people.
You’re no doubt correct. A bit like wondering if there’s a difference between Harvard and Princeton. Same thinking, guaranteed.
After the Soviet Union intervened in Afghanistan in 1979, Islamic mujahideen fighters engaged in war with those soviet forces. Some of those Islamic fighters would later transform into the Taliban according to Professor Carole Hillenbrand who stated: “The West helped the Taliban to fight the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan”.[9]
Although there isn’t any evidence that the CIA directly supported the Taliban or Al Qaeda, some basis for military support of the Taliban was provided when, in the early 1980s, the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ISI assisted the process of gathering radical Muslims from around the world to fight against the Soviets.[10] Osama Bin Laden was one of the key players in organizing training camps for the foreign Arab volunteers, although his organization, Maktab al-Khidamat, was exclusively Saudi funded.[11] [12]
The Taliban were based in the Helmand, Kandahar, and Uruzgan regions and were overwhelmingly ethnic Pashtuns and predominantly Durrani Pashtuns
Thank you for that, I was confused by my recollection that “taliban” referred to guys who’d received some kind of religious schooling different from what the general population received. I thought it was more than just a bunch of Muslims wanting to throw out the Soviets.
Mujahedin , meaning “warriors of God” , named themselves the “Taliban” ,
Thank you.
How about these inbred cucks stop supporting the USA? I’m pretty sure they, as muslims, are not fond of Israel around, so why the hell are they all colluding and collaborating in things that benefit Israel first, the US second while they actually get little from this mess, maybe some more oil income? Great! But then what? Short sightedness and treachery is rampant among them
Being a Muslim is not automatically equal to being against Israel. The combination of being informed+human does that, regardless of the person’s religion.
Plus, I doubt if we can count Wahhabism as an Islamic religion.
As you know , due to billions spent by Saudi , Qatar and the UAE promoting Salafist / Wahhabi ideology , for most Sunni people it is becoming what they know to be Islam.
What’s really sad is the world thinks Islam is what Wahhabis do.
Nice. You state “maybe some more oil income”, but that’s the daft thing, since they colluded with the US to dump the price to hurt the likes of Russia, Venezuela, Iran etc., they are bringing in much less income.
These countries (Qatar, Saudis, Jordan and Turkey) are just secondaries, the main countries helping the terrorists are USA-Israel-NATO.
Bullseye!
I see your point but think there is strong independent support from the other four. The US likes to say Iran is the leading sponsor of terror in the world but it is Saudi Arabia. Our “ally.” It finances salafist mosques in the US and prohibits Christian churches in SA. And we smile and bow down.
There are scared to death or the Shi’ite crescent.
So are Israel and, therefore, the U.S.
Oh God yes.
Fuck all these Arab leader pricks. To participate in such regional aggression against the Syrian people is disgusting. Rot in hell.
Damage has been already done.But thanks to Qatar for the honesty to tell the truth.Arabs are honest people if you betray them their tell the truth as it is.Let Saudi and UAE accept the wrongs and turn away from USA because USA is busy giving Arab oil territories to the Kurds.USA/Nato wants to limit its oil gain from Saudi Arabia.
As if they had any choice, they are being fed by Iran and Turkey.
…what can make the US admit they are behind all these trouble and killings in the middle east?
We are hopelessly confused, so don’t look for any such admission. Our self righteousness is the stuff of legend, as is our arrogance. Rex and Nikki will tell those Russians to straighten up!
After 9/11, al-Qaida was our most worstest enemy. Then, 10 years later, we were supporting it and ISIS in Syria. 400,000 civilian deaths, millions of refugees, and tens of thousands of military deaths. No problem! Then Libya and a mountain of our lies about Gaddafi. Thousands more deaths and hundreds of thousands of “refugees” streaming into Europe where the morons welcome them.
Today our political elite are in a rage over Russian “interference” in our affairs but won’t admit we worked hard at “regime change” in Egypt, Ukraine, Georgia, Kosovo, S. Africa, Rhodesia, Libya, and Syria. Where there should be “regime change,” as with Canada, Britain, France, and Germany, we do nothing.
Its sort of obvious when we look at US’ own legislated fine print. The CIA was founded in 1947, and a year later the US legislated a Bill called ‘NSC 10/2’ – authorizing the CIA to engage in covert actions across the entire world.
Covert action was defined as activities:
‘…which are conducted or sponsored by this government against hostile foreign states or groups or in support of friendly foreign states or groups but which are so planned and conducted that any US Government responsibility for them is not evident to unauthorized persons and that if uncovered the US Government can plausibly disclaim any responsibility for them.’
Specifically this included:
‘…propaganda; economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition, and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance movements, guerrillas and refugee liberation groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.’
This is what the CIA set themselves tasked to do – all the way back in 1948.
From the mid 2000’s the CIA were writing reports on likely and actively available options for subverting and overthrow the existing Syrian state leadership. They thought the long Syrian drought of later half of 2000’s was potential source of serious discontent among rural-agricultural conservative Sunni communities, and that the Syrian branch of fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, long in conflict with the secular Syrian state, was a potential existing internal Syrian network to maximize that discontent into open revolt and conflict.
They have admitted it – there are government documents, speeches where they do admit it.
Maybe a more pertinent question would be “what can make the American and European citizens understand that the US are behind all these trouble and killings in the middle east?”.
The proof is there and being censored as we type.
Saudi/Qatar/turkey realized that they cannot fight the Iranians and hezbollh ressitnce in Iraq/lebnon and Syria and allies Russia. so they backed off. now they want to be friend. bcuz they realized that they have diged their own grave and ressitance has grown 10 folds against themselves from all side . and now they are collaborating with Israel to save themselves but Israel cant even save themselves.
Don’t know, I would have thought it was more likely to be the other way around; the US p1ssed Turkey off with the attempted coup, the EU regards visa free travel and the immigrants, so they turned to Russia and so on and so on. My view only.
Hasn’t this former minister heard of the terms ‘fall guy’ or ‘scapegoat’?
Dear South Front editor,
I believe the article is written by SF team. Thank you.
I also would like to remind you that body of water’s name is NOT the Arabian, it is the Persian gulf, it has been so and hopefully will be so, IF respected journalists like yourselves don’t close their eyes to the fact or worse, perpetuate the using of the false name.
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Yes, no ….sort of.
In the context it was written, I would hope it meant:
“Arabian – Gulf Countries” i.e. not Iran = a “Persian – Gulf Country”.
I know what you mean, but still, it’s name is not the gulf.
Well I guess that’s everything the money can buy for the Persian gulf Arab monarchs. If they can’t have the Arabian version, they are content if there’s no Persian gulf either.
No, the Persian Gulf, like the Gulf of Mexico are commonly known just as “the Gulf”; short form, nickname.
I have noticed that the Yanks keep on referring to the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf which is not only pathetic, it is rather embarrassing to watch.
BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE.
All it is. is ambiguous and poor grammatical English.
I shall leave it at that, but I certainly would loose any sleep about it.
All right, but my interpretation was different and thus I made the original comment because as you pointed out, it’s ambiguous and open for interpretation. I too don’t think that SF did it intentionally.
Yeah. With Trump this became the norm for American officials. Former administrations usually were careful to call it’s name correctly.
I heard that one about the nickname before but I don’t buy it. It would be natural for us, which live near it to call it the gulf. For the Americans, the Gulf would be the natural nickname for the gulf of Mexico. Calling it by the Gulf is another way to keep Arab monarchs happy or at least don’t make them mad.
Anyway, thank you for the time you spent.
Cheers, catch you on the next one.
Given the way things have been since 1991, it should probably be called the American Gulf.
This guys statement sums up perfectly why the Arab world today is completely FUBAR-ed. In essence we were OK with “young Bashar”, but since our “Saudi brothers” wanted him dead we went along because – why not. Now that our “Saudi brothers” changed their mind about “young Bashar” – but also apparently about Qatar too – we are shocked. I mean not even a hint that “Saudi brothers” could turn against one of “the brothers” for no reason what so ever. And BTW they could’ve told us in advance they don’t want “young Bashar” dead any more because we never wanted him dead either and we really never had any beef with him in the first place. In the mean time we spent 10s of bn $ cash on old Russian weapons for Al Qaida in Syria and Iraq – all arranged and overpriced by our not-so-good friends in the US and Turkey. And we spent 100s of bn $ on brand new and overpriced US hardware for us – because playing US/Zio game as pawns brought us at logger heads with Iran and our sizable Shia population, plus even the Saudis want to invade now. I bet the Israelis laugh their heads off every time they see how easy it is to make these people kill their own kind for Zio interests and than even make them pick up the tab…
As if this is some kind of news :)
“ok let him stay we don’t have any problem” …….hey mo, it is not you letting him stay, it is the people of Syria, their heroic fighters and their fantastic allies.
Whilst I think this was a wise political move by Qatar – memories are very long when it included the loss of loved ones….. watch your back you ****er.
Former friend my ars3, he is no your deadly enemy, an enemy, parts of the World has realised that the likes of you, should not have created nor continued to kick whilst don.
Really sad state of the usual march of history.