The Anniversary of D-Day and the End of American Isolationism

Matthew VanDyke's grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz, who was at D-Day

My grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz, was at D-Day

With each footprint they left on the sands of Normandy on June 6, 1944, US soldiers were writing the future of our country. Their mission was to march forward towards the enemy, facing extraordinary danger and the horrors of war as bullets flew over their heads and their friends fell around them. There was no retreat and scarcely any refuge on the open, sandy beaches as they took endless fire from an entrenched, determined enemy.

Just as there could be no retreat from the mission that day, there could also be no retreat from the responsibility that the United States had taken on that reached far beyond the shores of France.

American isolationism, a mainstay of US foreign policy since the founding of the republic which only gained in popularity after WWI, came to an end on D-Day. Prior to WWII, Congress had barred the United States from even joining the League of Nations (a precursor to the United Nations) and had passed Neutrality Acts that codified isolationist policies as law.

These policies had only encouraged Nazi Germany’s rapid advance through Europe, and it was only after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and Germany subsequently declaring war on the United States that our country went to war.

The beginning of the end of Hitler’s reign of terror through Europe started on D-Day, June 6, 1944. My grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz, was there. As his landing craft approached the shores of Normandy, another one nearby was hit by enemy fire and exploded. His survived, and his service in the US Army would take him across Europe and eventually to Germany, where he saw the horrors inflicted by the Nazi concentration camps on the emaciated survivors who were saved by the US Army.

Matthew VanDyke's grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz, serving in Europe during WWII

My grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz, serving in Europe during WWII

Those camps were one of many factors that led to a permanent shift in US foreign policy following WWII. No longer would the United States sit idly by and watch other parts of the world descend into chaos and barbarity, or wait until it was nearly too late to act in the interest of national, and international, security. A shift away from isolationist policies also became necessary in a new, post-war era where America needed to compete on the world stage with another emerging superpower, the Soviet Union.

In recent years, following the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there has been a growing isolationist sentiment among the American public that is reminiscent of what occurred after WWI. And similar to the period after WWI, US foreign policy has shifted towards isolationism in a way that has had a disastrous effect on international security. The two most notable examples are US inaction on Syria, which has contributed greatly to regional instability in the Middle East and a resurgence of Al Qaeda, and a muted response to Russian expansionism in Ukraine that will have profound consequences for Europe and beyond.

One of the key lessons of WWII, the consequences of isolationism, appears to have been largely forgotten. The United States cannot afford to wait until threats to international security are boiling over before taking action. Europe was nearly lost to fascism in WWII because of a timid, isolationist foreign policy that failed to provide adequate support to the French and British early in the war. The costs of action became much greater later in the war when it became necessary to save Europe through massive national mobilization that would bring to bear the full might of the US military starting on D-Day, June 6, 1944.

Americans should honor the sacrifices made and the victories achieved on D-Day with more than ceremonies and celebrations, but also by continuing forward in the spirit of what our country accomplished on that pivotal day in world history. We must march towards the enemies of freedom with the same courage shown by those men on D-Day no matter how difficult the task or the sacrifices necessary to preserve liberty not only for ourselves, but for others around the world. Just as it was seventy years ago, if America isn’t going to do it, who will? The answer remains the same.

Matthew VanDyke's grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz

My grandfather, US Army Sergeant Aaron Steltz

Review of Roll Hard by Robert Young Pelton and Billy Tucci

Roll Hard is a new graphic novel by Robert Young Pelton and artist Billy Tucci about when Pelton was a journalist accompanying Blackwater security contractors on missions in Baghdad, Iraq in 2004.

The cover of the graphic novel

It is a phenomenal book. I rarely read graphic novels and I cannot remember when I last read any book cover to cover until I read Roll Hard. I’m not exaggerating when I say it really is so good that you won’t want to put it down.

I haven’t written a book review on this blog before, so I’d like to first address why I’m writing this one. First, Roll Hard really is good enough to warrant me writing a book review. Second, Roll Hard provides a very good insight into both the world of military contracting and the risks involved in conflict journalism. Third, Robert Young Pelton is not only my colleague, but someone who has given me very useful advice during our conversations over the past couple of years.

As a teenager I read Pelton’s bestselling book The World’s Most Dangerous Places, a highly entertaining guide with a sense of humor to which the book owes much of its success. Nearly two decades later I never imagined that I’d be having conversations with Pelton seeking his career advice and discussing with him many of the challenges and struggles in my work.

He’s smart, honest, generous with his time, and one of the most experienced experts on working on conflict zones. And importantly, Robert Young Pelton is also one of the very few individuals I know of whose career is in any way similar to my own.

So when he sent me Roll Hard to review I didn’t wait long before giving it a read.

Roll Hard offers an incredible look behind at the curtain at the extraordinary and controversial world of military contracting, which is covered in detail in Pelton’s book Licensed to Kill: Hired Guns in the War on Terror.

A MK2 Mamba Armored Transport Vehicle and MH6 Little Birds in the graphic novel

Roll Hard tells the story of the Mamba Team, a team of heavily armed misfits with a hard-earned reputation for getting the job done in Iraq. Pelton went on missions with them in Baghdad as a journalist in 2004 during the Iraq War, and the bulk of the book is a combination of an edge-of-your-seat account of missions along “RPG Alley” (Route Irish, which ran from Baghdad International Airport to the Green Zone). In 2004 it was the deadliest stretch of road in the world and under frequent attack by insurgents using suicide bombers, snipers, IEDs, and of course, RPGs.

Robert Young Pelton with a Blackwater security contractor of the Mamba Team in the graphic novel

Robert Young Pelton rode along in one of the Mamba Team’s MK2 Mamba Armored Troop Transport vehicles on RPG Alley, and his writing, combined with famed illustrator Billy Tucci’s incredible illustrations (the best I’ve seen in a graphic novel), really capture the mixture of anxiety, adrenaline, and uncertainty in the Mamba Team’s missions.

Robert Young Pelton in the crosshairs of an insurgent sniper in the graphic novel

Robert Young Pelton in the crosshairs of an insurgent sniper in “Roll Hard”

As they face explosions and sniper’s bullets, and the unnerving reality of not being sure which civilians around them are actually insurgents trying to kill them, you really feel like you’re in a Mamba with Pelton and the team.

Robert Young Pelton and MH6

Next Pelton takes to the skies, climbing into a MH-6 Little Bird with the Night Stalkers air support contractors and zipping around Baghdad “fast, low and erratic” to avoid enemy fire. It sounds like something out of Hollywood, but it was real and Pelton captures it masterfully in Roll Hard.

A Blackwater military contractor in the graphic novel

As important as his captivating account of front line missions, however, is the insight Pelton provides into who the men of the Mamba Team were and why they were willing to assume such risk to their lives for a paycheck. The result is an incredible behind-the-scenes view of Blackwater and military contracting.

Roll Hard ends with the story of what happened to some of the Mamba Team in 2005 and 2006, after Pelton’s 2004 experiences with them. You’ll have to read Roll Hard to find out.

Roll Hard is available in print and e-book from AdventuristMedia.com.

Robert Young Pelton is currently fundraising for a mission to track down the Ugandan war criminal Joseph Kony. Learn more and donate to support the mission at ExpeditionKony.com.

Read Robert Young Pelton’s article about Matthew VanDyke in Dangerous Magazine: “Matt VanDyke: Filmmaker/Fighter”

I Saw The Horrors of War at Dar al-Shifa Hospital in Syria

A year ago today, I began filming the documentary about Syria, Not Anymore: A Story of Revolution.

On my first day of filming I saw a baby without a head brought to Dar al-Shifa Hospital in Aleppo, Syria. I wrote a detailed account of what happened at the hospital that day and posted it on my Facebook page that evening.

I had seen the horrible realities of war while filming in Iraq and while fighting in Libya that no person should ever see. But what I saw in Syria that day, on my first day of filming Not Anymore: A Story of Revolution, would be seared into my memory for the rest of my life and strengthen my resolve to fight against any government that would do this to its own citizens:

Click here to read what I saw that day in Syria

What Is the UK Sending to Rebels in Syria? You Might Be Surprised.

The Independent has a story out today detailing what the UK is sending to the Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebels in Syria.

When they read The Independent article, supporters of the revolution won’t know whether to laugh or cry.

Here is my assessment, based on what has been reported in the article:

Five 4×4 vehicles with ballistic protection – one convoy for a FSA general they like Six 4×4 SUVs – one convoy for a FSA general they don’t like
20 sets of body armour – 20 rebels are going to feel like they won the lottery
Four trucks (three 25 tonne, one 20 tonne) – to carry the bodies of those who didn’t win the body armor
Five non-armoured pick-ups – for retreating when you realize the UK didn’t send you any weapons or ammunition
One recovery vehicle – a tow truck to haul back the destroyed wrecks of the 4x4s and trucks that were sent
Four fork-lifts – to unload the weapons and ammunition that wasn’t sent
Three advanced “resilience kits” for region hubs, designed to rescue people in emergencies – is three enough to rescue 20 million Syrians?
130 solar powered batteries – because the environment is the top priority
Around 400 radios – rebels can use these to desperately call for the weapons and ammunition that wasn’t sent
Water purification – there’s chemical weapons in the air, but at least the water will be clean
Rubbish collection kits – it won’t be a good war for television if there’s rubbish everywhere
Laptops and VSATs (small satellite systems for data communications) – so the rebels can read on the internet how the international press has labeled them all extremists
Printers – to print a sign saying “great, now please send us the weapons and ammunition we need to win this war.”

“In addition, funds have been allocated for civic society projects such as inter-community dialogue” – dialogue has worked so well in this conflict so far
“and gathering evidence of human rights abuses” – documenting and complaining about human rights abuses is far easier than international intervention to stop them from happening in the first place

“The last “gift” to the opposition, announced by William Hague last week, is that £555,000 worth of counter-chemical warfare equipment is on standby… Even the chemical equipment may not be of much use without adequate training. Potential users need the ability to assess threats and calculate the correct dosage for medication, along with an appreciation of differing field conditions…” – Perhaps it is better this way, since the pain of burning eyes and skin will at least be a distraction from the pain of feeling abandoned by the world.

Jolly good show, mates.

(This article is also available in Arabic and French)

The Long, Hard Slog That Is Syria

This week’s blog post is at The Huffington Post

The Long, Hard Slog That Is Syria

“Standing on the front lines in Aleppo you can’t just smell the gunpowder, you can smell the depression.  It hangs in the air far thicker than smoke, and with far worse effects.  The fighters have a hard time seeing through it but they push forward anyway, having no choice.”

 

 

Read it by clicking here

 

(Also available in French here)

Please leave comments at The Huffington Post website below the article!

Escape from Abu Salim Prison

Escape from Abu Salim Prison

One year ago today I escaped from Abu Salim prison in Libya.  I had spent half a year being psychologically tortured in solitary confinement, pacing in my cell, staring at the walls and fearing that this would be all I would know for the rest of my life.

matthew vandyke in maktab al-nasser prison, tripoli, libya

On the 165th day of this unimaginable hell, prisoners came to my cell and broke off the lock.  I escaped Abu Salim with other prisoners of war and we ran for our lives.

That night I was watching the story of my escape on CNN.

The world thought I was dead for most of the time I was in Abu Salim prison – I was missing in action.  Despite the widespread belief that I was buried in the desert, Human Rights Watch (HRW) advocated for my release and the international press covered the story.  Only in the last two weeks before my escape did the Gaddafi regime even admit that I was alive and in custody, but they still would not let anyone see me or check on my condition.

HRW went to Abu Salim a few weeks before the prison break and was told I wasn’t there.  I was there, and I was being held in solitary confinement under deplorable conditions.  The Gaddafi regime did not care what the US government, NGOs, or the international press had to say.  I would still be in that cell, if not executed, if we hadn’t won the war.

I had come to help the Libyan rebels, and then the Libyan rebels came to help me.  My fellow rebel prisoners broke me out of the cell and we escaped together.  There was no outside intervention to save me from the horrors of Abu Salim.

A few days after my escape, I was at the Corinthia Hotel as a guest of the rebel government and I came under intense pressure, especially from HRW, to leave Libya.  The international press started calling my mother telling her to convince me to leave as well.  The press was confused about why I was still in Tripoli days after escaping from Abu Salim prison, as if I was waiting for something.

I was waiting for something – for Nouri.  Nouri Fonas was my friend of four years with whom I had been serving in the rebel forces before I was captured.  Transportation was difficult and it took Nouri a few days to arrive from Benghazi.  Soon after he arrived, we left Tripoli together.

The press and HRW had no idea where I went.  They assumed I had conceded to their demands and gone home.

Instead, Nouri and I spent one night in Benghazi, paid a visit to the Ministry of Defence, and then headed back to the front line.  We joined the Ali Hassan al-Jaber brigade, were assigned a military jeep that we fitted with a DShK heavy machine gun, and returned to the war.

freedom fighter Matthew VanDyke in the libya war

Just as when I first joined the revolution in March 2011, nobody was supposed to know about my return to the front lines.  My participation in Libya’s revolution was supposed to be a secret, a personal matter, but being captured and imprisoned in Abu Salim erased my anonymity.  I tried once again to stay below the radar when returning to the front lines after prison until a photographer spotted me as I passed through a checkpoint in the jeep.  The secret was out.

It was for the best, it turned out.  Occasionally, I was able to take the press with me in the jeep to the front lines so they could report on the war while I fought in it, giving them a safe escort in an otherwise uncertain conflict zone.  And thanks to our commander giving Nouri and I a lot of freedom to move as we wanted and fight where we wanted, we had a rare grasp of what was happening on the various front lines in Sirte.  We fought at many different areas on the front lines alongside various other brigades, making us a reliable source of information for the media.

Nevertheless, I was criticized after the war by men incapable of understanding why someone who endured nearly six months of hell in the notorious Abu Salim prison would return to combat after escaping.  To this day some of these individuals, from the comfort of their homes in Europe and the United States, have tried to disparage me for keeping the commitment I made to Libya the day I first put on a uniform in March 2011.

Their criticism speaks volumes about their character, not mine.  I told the rebels when I joined them in March 2011 that I would not leave Libya until the country was free.  I honor my word; that is how I was raised.  I would also not leave Libya before the men I was captured with were accounted for – they could have been in prison in Sirte or another Gaddafi-held city.  Why would I ever abandon them?  Furthermore, how could I leave Libya when there were any prisoners of war still being held by the regime?

These wars of liberation aren’t a game and there aren’t any timeouts.  The war in Libya, and the war now raging in Syria, are all-or-nothing pursuits.  As Omar Mukhtar said, “We will not surrender. We win or we die.”  As I write this, there are thousands of prisoners waiting in their cells in Syria, just as I was waiting in a Libyan prison last year. 

No amount of reporting, NGO press releases, or rhetoric will get them out – Bashar al-Assad doesn’t care what anyone says, just like Gaddafi didn’t care what any of them said about me.

This isn’t the time for observation.  This isn’t the time for politely discussing the situation at the UN, or standing at podiums issuing idle threats about what might happen if lines that we keep moving are somehow crossed.  We are way past going through the motions of diplomacy. 

Those thousands of Syrian prisoners – men, women, and children- are waiting for us.  Each day they stare at the walls and wonder if it will be their last.  I know the feeling, and I’ll do whatever I can to help them escape from their Abu Salim.

And I’m starting with this film.

After Aleppo

This week’s blog post is at The Huffington Post

“After Aleppo”

“Taking the fight to the streets of Damascus and Aleppo over the past few weeks wasn’t about holding territory. It was a demonstration of FSA capabilities, a display intended for both a Syrian and international audience and designed to achieve several broader goals.”

Read it by clicking here

(also available in French here)

Please leave comments at The Huffington Post website below the article!

Have the U.S. and Europe Helped Arm and Empower Islamist Militants in Syria?

Have The U.S. and Europe Helped Arm and Empower Islamist Militants in Syria?

Matthew VanDyke and Nouri Fonas with ammunition they acquired from Rajma Libya

Nouri Fonas and I, March 9, 2011. We found these boxes of ammuntion in the destroyed Rajma base, along with 60mm mortar tubes from WWII. Most of the weapons used by rebel forces were captured from Gaddafi's army, including my AK-47, FN FAL, and DShK machine gun.

One of the primary arguments against arming the Syrian rebels is that their lack of organization and centralized command means that the weapons could fall into the hands of Islamist militants and terrorists in their ranks. This argument is based on a combination of various influences – legitimate concern, an inability of CIA and State Department analysts to think outside the cubicle, groupthink in policy circles, and a natural aversion to such a politically risky policy.

This timidity and lack of leadership will ensure one thing: that Islamist militants get weapons.

And he who controls the weapons controls the revolution.

There are six reasons why the Syrian rebels must be supplied with arms and ammunition from the U.S., Europe, or the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) through the Syrian National Council (SNC) before it is too late:

  1. The rebels will get weapons from other sources. It is in our interest to buy influence and favor with them by supplying the weapons ourselves.
  2. Syrians will become more religiously radicalized the longer the war continues, as the suffering and death tend to make people more religious during war and potentially susceptible to extremist ideologies. The sooner the rebels receive the weapons, the sooner the war will end, reducing the impact of this phenomenon.
  3. Without conventional weapons the rebels may have no choice but to resort to bombings, including suicide bombings. This will spur radicalization, spread knowledge of explosive methods and technology, and turn Syria into a training ground for a new generation of terrorists.
  4. Islamist militants will be among the first to die in the war anyway because they actively seek martyrdom. Even those with second thoughts at least believe that God will protect them, which significantly diminishes their capacity for self-preservation on the battlefield. I witnessed this on occasion when I was fighting in the Libyan civil war.
  5. Supplying weapons through the SNC will allow the SNC to control the flow of weapons and ammunition to the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and other rebel groups. Conditions can be placed on the SNC for the receipt of arms and its members can be held accountable for which rebel units receive weapons. Foreign advisers can also be on the ground and blacklist certain units from receiving weapons as a condition of supplying the SNC.
  6. Most importantly: Islamist militants are very good at acquiring weapons on their own through networking with terrorists and insurgents from Iraq and elsewhere in the region. By not supplying the rebels ourselves we are increasing the importance and influence of Islamist militants by making the Islamists the main players in arming the revolution.

I initially wrote these six points in response to an inquiry on a LinkedIn forum by a colleague asking for my opinion on arming the rebels because of concerns that they are becoming radicalized. A week after I wrote my response on the forum, Reuters published an article that confirms this is exactly what is happening in Syria.

From the Reuters article “Rebel rivalries and suspicions threaten Syria revolt”:

“Many say Islamist groups, from hard-line Salafists to the exiled Muslim Brotherhood, bankroll many battalions that share their religious outlook”

“Fighters say private donors, possibly frontmen for Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have funneled millions of dollars to favored rebel groups. Many suspect the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis are getting the lion’s share”

“Leftist politicians and other opponents of Islamists are trying to counter that influence by funding rival armed bands”

“We felt forced into aligning with the Free Syrian Army because it is the most widely known. If it gets recognized, we’ll get foreign aid,’ says the Idlib rebel Mahmoud.”

A few days later, another Reuters article revealed that the rebels are being forced to resort to bombings since they don’t have enough guns and ammunition:

“We are starting to get smarter about tactics and use bombs because people are just too poor and we don’t have enough rifles”

“You are going to start seeing an escalation as we improve our techniques of bomb-making and delivery.”

Recently there have been a series of terrorist attacks by Islamist militant groups within the Syrian revolution. These groups are gaining influence and becoming key players in the revolution because they can claim tactical victories against the regime. Rebels using conventional and guerilla tactics have been far less effective lately against Assad’s overwhelmingly better equipped military, supplied by Russia.

Unless the rebels are supplied with the weapons and ammunition they need to wage an effective insurgency, the revolution will be increasingly in the hands of the Islamist militants.

By not supplying the SNC with arms, the U.S. and Europe are essentially arming and empowering these Islamist militants.

We are on a collision course with the realities of the Arab Spring. It is time to take the wheel and do what we do best in the Middle East: buy influence with weapons and money.

The Houla Massacre in Syria Is Just the Beginning

The Houla Massacre in Syria Is Just the Beginning

March 7, 2011. Nouri, Ali, and I were in Benghazi, watching television for news of the Libyan civil war we would soon be fighting in. It had been a long day – we recovered Ali’s Toyota Hilux pickup truck that was damaged in the Rajma military base bombing, made some quick repairs, and got it back on the road as our combat vehicle.
It was my first day in the revolution; I had been in Libya for less than 24 hours.

The town of Bin Jawad had just fallen to Gaddafi’s forces that day and Ali shared with us the disturbing news he had heard.

Fifty rebels had been captured in Bin Jawad.  They weren’t taken to prison. They weren’t even given the mercy of a bullet in the head.

They were burned alive.

Matthew VanDyke talking with Nouri Fonas and Ali about the capture of Bin Jawad by Gaddafi's forces

Photo from my conversation with Ali and Nouri Fonas about the capture of Bin Jawad on March 7, 2011. I was captured with Ali and two other rebels in Brega on March 13, 2011. Ali was missing for nearly a year until his body was found in a mass grave months after the war ended.

News of a massacre in Bin Jawad did not deter us. Rather, it increased our resolve to fight, and to get to the front line as soon as possible and do whatever we could to stop Gaddafi’s advance towards Benghazi.

And it will be the same with the rebels in Syria. For every person in Houla who had their homes destroyed by artillery, for every rebel fighter who stood his ground and was killed by Assad’s army, for every woman and child who had their throats cut by the Alawite shabiha militias that swarmed the town after the shelling had stopped – a dozen, maybe a hundred, maybe a thousand Syrians will join the ranks of the Free Syrian Army and fight to the death to avenge them.

This is just the beginning

The Houla massacre is emblematic of the savagery that is rapidly defining the Syrian civil war and it provides a disturbing insight into where this war is headed.

The following is certain:

1. Revenge will be taken by the people of Houla against nearby Alawite villages where the shabiha militias came from.

2. These Alawite villages will be razed, just as the Libyan town of Tawergha was razed by militias from Misrata for supporting Gaddafi during the war and because some Tawerghan men participated in the assault on Misrata and allegedly in the rape of Misratan women.

3.  When Assad falls there will hardly be an Alawite left in Syria. Many will flee and most of those who remain will be killed.  The majority of Syrian Christians, a group that supports the regime out of fear of what might replace it, will follow them into Turkey and Lebanon.

4. Revenge killings by the various sects will continue long after the regime falls.

5. The sectarian conflict in Syria will exacerbate sectarian divisions in neighboring Lebanon, igniting violence that could escalate into small-scale civil war in various parts of that country as well.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) has made an effort to control its forces and minimize sectarian strife and atrocities committed by the rebel forces, but without a centralized command structure, organization, and a way to hold individuals accountable for their actions there isn’t much they can really do to keep a cycle of revenge from spiraling out of control in the coming months.

Syria has already surpassed Libya in terms of brutality, violations of human rights, and unapologetic savagery. It is devolving into an African-style genocidal civil war reminiscent of Rwanda and the best we can realistically hope for at this point is a Lebanese-style civil war (which lasted 15 years and resulted in hundreds of thousands of casualties).

Neither of these are good scenarios, but one of them is going to happen.  Whether it is the worst case or the least-worst case scenario will depend on how soon the West intervenes. Inaction will lead to more massacres and Houla will just be one of many, alphabetized under “H” along with Hama and Homs on a “Syria massacres” Wikipedia page.

The Assad regime must be thoroughly destroyed, dismantled, and overthrown with no remnant of it remaining. NATO did a tremendous job assisting us in Libya, ending the war more quickly with far fewer lives lost than would otherwise have been possible.  It is likely I would still be a prisoner of war today (or still fighting Gaddafi if I had been traded or released) if it weren’t for NATO intervention in Libya.  The unequivocal defeat of Gaddafi’s forces through NATO airpower combined with our rebel forces on the ground has allowed Libya to progress with relative stability and no signs of a counter-insurgency against the new government.

It is time for NATO to act, with or without UN approval. Houla should be a catalyst for action, not because of the massacre itself, but because of what the aftermath will be if such massacres are allowed to continue.  The massacre in Houla, the shelling of Homs, and the current assault on Hama have already begun a chain reaction of revenge killings that will continue even after Assad is overthrown.  By the time the violence stops, Syria will be an almost entirely Sunni country with very few Alawites or Christians left standing.

And once that happens, they’ll turn on each other.

———————————————————————————————————-

Note: I have not found any published reports of rebels being burned alive in Bin Jawad and have thus been unable to confirm whether what Ali heard really did happen. However, Associated Press reported on March 7, 2011 that 50 rebels were captured in Bin Jawad – that part of the story is confirmed – it is only whether they were burned alive or not that is in question. During the war there were many stories coming from the front lines, not all of which were accurate. Please contact me if you have any evidence or details about this incident.

Russian and Chinese Arms Sales to Authoritarian Regimes – Part 2 (China)

Russian and Chinese Arms Sales to Authoritarian Regimes – Part 2 (China)

China: The Evil Twin?

This article is Part 2 of Russian and Chinese Arms Sales to Authoritarian Regimes.  Part 1 can be found here.

This article is also available in Arabic (العربية) at Free Syrian Translators

As Russia equips the world’s authoritarian regimes with the means to discourage Western intervention, China is selling them one of the worst tools of oppression against their own people: artillery.

(Artillery, as defined by the FAS report, includes field and air defense artillery, mortars, rocket launchers and recoiless rifles and FROG launchers 100mm and over)

Artillery sold by China (2003-2010): 1,890

Artillery sold by the US (2003-2010): 390

Why artillery?  Assad’s shelling of Syrian cities like Homs shows how essential artillery is to waging an effective campaign against a popular uprising.

Map showing artillery damage after Assad's army bombed Homs Syria
Map showing artillery damage after Assad’s army bombed Homs, Syria

In Syria, the use of artillery by Bashar al-Assad has accomplished numerous goals:

  1. Artillery has allowed Assad to avoid the mistake that Muammar Gaddafi made – using airpower to bombard the opposition – which led to calls for a no-fly zone and eventually Western military intervention to remove the regime.
  2. Artillery bombardment allows the regime to kill not only freedom fighters but also civilians, reducing the pool of potential recruits and dramatically increasing the war weariness of the population.
  3. The large-scale destruction of towns and cities serves as a warning to the civilian population not to support the uprising, and discourages rebels from holding ground in cities because of the destruction the regime response will cause.
  4. Using artillery provides the regime with some plausible deniability of intent when civilian buildings are hit (such as hospitals or media centers) because it is indirect fire.
  5. Artillery allows the regime to bombard the enemy from a distance, keeping the army together so as to prevent individual units from defecting to the other side.

These Chinese artillery purchases are in addition to all of the Russian artillery already purchased by the regimes in the past and doesn’t even include the smaller mortars (60mm and 80mm).  Syria and other authoritarian regimes have acquired a truly massive stockpile of artillery rounds for leveling cities and destroying any uprising against their rule.

China has been particularly aggressive with artillery sales to Africa.  Algeria, Sudan, and Egypt (under Hosni Mubarak) have purchased the 155mm howitzers from China.  China shipped mortars and rockets to President Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe despite international pressure in 2008.

When the regimes don’t have enough cash to pay for the weapons China negotiates trade deals for the natural resources of the countries, allowing the regimes to further pillage the country and the resources of its people in exchange for the arms to remain in power.  This is part of the reason that China deals with pariah states under sanction by other countries; in their weakened state the regimes are forced to enter into resource deals on terms very benficial to China in exchange for weapons.  This allows China to expand influence in the Third World and obtain resources it depends on for economic growth.

Protecting Their Investment

The Russian and Chinese arms trade with authoritarian regimes isn’t just about money and resources.  Russia and China view themselves as superpowers intent on spreading their influence throughout the world.  Chinese weapons are viewed as cheap substitutes for Russian arms and as a consequence they’re the budget alternative for many authoritarian regimes.  With China’s focus on economic power as their means of influence in the world this presents an opportunity for them to ship cheap weapons to the Third World in exchange for favorable trade terms, natural resources, and establishing a foothold in developing countries.