Al Qaeda Goes to Syria: How to Build an Emirate OvernightBy Ulson Gunnar With what money? With what political support? How do you pass the various borders between Pakistan and Syria to even arrive in your new emirate? Like a narrative of a Saturday morning cartoon, the New York Times article, Al Qaeda Turns to Syria, With a Plan to Challenge ISIS, asks us to suspend disbelief, reporting: Al Qaedas top leadership in Pakistan, badly weakened after a decade of C.I.A. drone strikes, has decided that the terror groups future lies in Syria and has secretly dispatched more than a dozen of its most seasoned veterans there, according to senior American and European intelligence and counterterrorism officials. The NYT also claims: The operatives have been told to start the process of creating an alternate headquarters in Syria and lay the groundwork for possibly establishing an emirate through Al Qaedas Syrian affiliate, the Nusra Front, to compete with the Islamic State, from which Nusra broke in 2013. This would be a significant shift for Al Qaeda and its affiliate, which have resisted creating an emirate, or formal sovereign state, until they deem conditions on the ground are ready. Such an entity could also pose a heightened terrorist threat to the United States and Europe. It is extraordinary that Al Qaeda can openly announce this, so openly it is covered in the New York Times, and that there is any chance of it actually taking place (assuming the Western World really is fighting a War on Terror). It is equally extraordinary that the New York Times would make such an announcement without enumerating just what this emirate entails or with what resources Al Qaeda had to implement it with. The NYT describes Al Qaedas emirate as a formal sovereign state, and little else. A formal sovereign state requires many things the New York Times failed to mention, among which are: Even for existing nation-states, getting all of this right is an immense challenge. Yet Al Qaeda and its Syrian franchise Al Nusra seem to have made great progress already laying such groundwork. For instance, Al Nusra has police, runs schools, has hospitals and clinics, obviously has an army, and clearly has no trouble finding money. The real question is, how have they managed to do this? This is a particularly easy question to answer if one reads between the lines of even US and European newspapers. For example, in its 2013 article titled, Islamist Rebels Create Dilemma on Syria Policy, the New York Times admits: Nusras hand is felt most strongly in Aleppo, where the group has set up camp in a former childrens hospital and has worked with other rebel groups to establish a Shariah Commission in the eye hospital next door to govern the citys rebel-held neighborhoods. The commission runs a police force and an Islamic court that hands down sentences that have included lashings, though not amputations or executions as some Shariah courts in other countries have done. Nusra fighters also control the power plant and distribute flour to keep the citys bakeries running. While the NYT attempts to claim this is all funded by stolen oil, it must be remembered that someone must buy that stolen oil. The Syrian government is not buying it, so who is? The answer is given by NYTs admission of Al Nusras strongest influence being in Aleppo, right across the border from Turkey who clearly is both buying stolen oil from Al Nusra (and the Islamic State) as well as subsidizing their occupation of Syria in many other ways. It is interesting that NYT mentions Al Nusras control over bakeries. Controlling bakeries and distributing bread to locals is one of the key activities prescribed by US strategy papers in winning over local populations. It should then be no surprise to find out who is providing these Al Nusra-controlled bakeries with a steady supply of flour, the United States. In the Washington Posts article, also published in 2013, U.S. feeds Syrians, but secretly, it is stated that: In the heart of rebel-held territory in Syrias northern province of Aleppo, a small group of intrepid Westerners is undertaking a mission of great stealth. Living anonymously in a small rural community, they travel daily in unmarked cars, braving airstrikes, shelling and the threat of kidnapping to deliver food and other aid to needy Syrians all of it paid for by the U.S. government. The Washington Post, in the same article, even admits that most of the residents believe the flour is from Al Nusra, since it is Al Nusra passing out the bread it is made from: The bakery is fully supplied with flour paid for by the United States. But [local resident] Waisi credited Jabhat al-Nusra a rebel group the United States has designated a terrorist organization because of its ties to al-Qaeda with providing flour to the region, though he admitted he wasnt sure where it comes from. Reading either the NYT article or the Washington Post piece separately would leave readers confused. Reading them together makes it clear that Al Nusras ability to create the groundwork for Al Qaedas upcoming emirate is owed entirely to the United States and its coalition allies, including Turkey. Jubhat Al Nusra, a US State Department listed foreign terrorist organization, is considered one of the largest and most influential forces on the battlefield in Syria fighting Damascus, second only to the self-proclaimed Islamic State. Stanford University in its report titled, Mapping Militant Organizations: Jabhat al-Nusra, admits that: Al-Nusra is one of the best-equipped rebel groups in Syria Second only to ISIS, al-Nusra attracts the most foreign fighters among rebel groups in the Syrian civil war. These fighters mostly come from the Middle East, but also from Chechnya and European states, with a smaller number from more distant countries like Australia and the United States. Considering the immense resources admitted by the United States, the European Union, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar pledged to rebel groups in Syria, an alarming question arises when considering how much better equipped and funded Al Nusra appears to be. Where precisely are they getting more funding to be so much better equipped than rebel groups the US and its allies are pouring billions of dollars into? How is Al Nusra able to acquire more resources than the combined efforts of America, Europe and the Persian Gulf? The answer is just as alarming. It is not a coincidence that the US has spent billions on training programs for rebel groups that do not exist and are not currently fighting on the Syrian battlefield. The money was truly spent, but not on rebels. Instead, the money, through Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar, has gone straight into Al Nusras war chests, armories and administrative budgets. The proof stares the world in the face each day with headlines of Al Nusras spanning exploits amid Syrias grinding war. And as much has even been admitted. Articles like the Independents, Turkey and Saudi Arabia alarm the West by backing Islamist extremists the Americans had bombed in Syria, the New York Times, U.S. Relies Heavily on Saudi Money to Support Syrian Rebels, and the BBCs, Arming Syrian rebels: Where the US went wrong, add up to paint a stark picture of a United States and the coalition of allies it leads, intentionally building up Al Nusra and sustaining its occupation and entrenchment in Syria. This groundwork, courtesy of the United States and its allies, is what Al Qaeda is building its emirate on. No explanation is ever given as to how the fictional character, Cobra Commander, could supply the cartoon battlefield of the popular American cartoon, G.I. Joe, each week with a new army of fully equipped villains. No explanation is needed because it is a cartoon. However, for the New York Times, a prominent American newspaper, to announce Al Qaedas plans to move to Syria but give no explanation as to how they are doing so politically or financially, is further evidence of just how inconvenient the truth actually is. Al Qaedas entire history since its inception in the 1980s to present day isa story of state-sponsored terrorism and proxy military campaigns. There is no possible means for Al Qaeda to have accomplished any of what it did without vast state-sponsorship behind it. And there is no possible way for it to do so today without vast state-sponsorship. This is why the New York Times refuses to ask difficult questions or quantify just what precisely is required to build Al Qaedas new emirate apparently overnight. Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook. The Global Elite propping up and shuffling around Al Qaeda and ISIS appears to be critical for creating a cover narrative to move forward fracturing middle eastern nations. Creating the large Kurdish homeland (a state nearly as large as many surrounding nations) will require large sections of territory taken out of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. As well, Iraq is to be formally splintered into three sections. The Wall Street Journal floated the idea of fracturing the United States in a Peggy Noonan column last summer. More chaos! The CIA and MI-6 Created Al Qaeda originally to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Their membership was largely recruited from The Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Osama bin Laden was their paymaster, using Saudi money to hide the U.S. and U.K. involvement. Later Al Qaeda would be used against Russia in Chechnya and against Yugoavia in the 1990s and against Lybia in 2010, as documented in CIA: Crime Incorporated of America. The same Al Qaeda forces were then smuggled into Syria to destroy that nation. There they morphed into ISIS and Al Nusera. Dont believe that these groups are fighting each other or that there are moderate rebels. They take on different names to keep everyone confused. And of course, this article is correct. What an abomination! Doesnt the US know that if you dance with the devil you get burned? Very nice article, thanks Ulson. 