William Hague's Doublethink and Syria

Hague's preparedness to back Sunni fundamentalists in Syria is purely Orwellian now. Hamas has switched sides to back the sunni fundamentalists against Hizbollah and Assad. And Hague is prepared to back a side that has Hamas style insurgents if not the practical possibility of backing jihadists close to or actually Al Qaida.

The Lebanese Daily Star in Beirut has reported,

'Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, switched allegiances and broke off with President Bashar Assad’s government in the wake of the uprisings.

Last Thursday, Palestinian refugees from Syria set fire to humanitarian aid donated by Hezbollah in the Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp, citing their anger over the party’s role fighting alongside the Syrian regime'.

Yet Hamas are still regarded officially as 'terrorists' . If Hamas were to come out in direct support of the 'rebels',Hague would be backing those he and the British establishment regards as terrorists. Maybe 'we are all Hamas now"...And would they be rehabilitated as 'rebels' ? This is why his foreign policy is so fundamentally stupid.

The situation is a black farce and shows the schizophrenia caused by being dependent upon Saudi Arabia for oil and having to stand by it as a 'strategic partner'.

...................................................................................................................................................................

From the Guardian,

The White House has accused Hezbollah and Iran of being "partners in tyranny" after their role in the Syrian government's retaking of the strategic town of Qusair. The White House spokesman Jay Carney said:

What Washington means is that they fear Iranian backed domination of Syria because it goes against their geopolitical interests. That is shown in the absurdity of the statement by Jay Carney about how they are concerned about one side winning victories in a brutal war with a strong sectarian bias.

We remain very concerned, and we condemn in the strongest possible terms the Assad regime's assault on Qusair ... It is clear that the regime is unable to contest the opposition's control of a place like Qusair on their own, and that is why they are dependent on Hezbollah and Iran to do their work for them. The fact that a regime like Assad has its partners in tyranny here – Hezbollah and Iran – says a great deal about their intentions and the fact that Assad's principal concern has been his own grasp on power, not his own people – people that he's butchered.

Take the words 'partners in tyranny' out of that statement and it simply reads as though the US establishment simply prefers its partners in the region who are backing sunni fundamentalists and insurgents such as Saudi Arabia. One could just as reasonably call the US and UK 'partners in tyranny'.

In fact, the US has not stated, as the Guardian states, that Iran and Hezbollah are 'partners in tyranny' but both these backers and the Assad regime are considered 'partners' in tyranny' because the US wants to draw attention to Shia 'tyranny' instead of its backing for sunni fundamentalists.

It's important to notice these sleights of hand and rhetorical tricks as well as interpreting them as part of a deceptive geopolitical agenda.