On Sunday USA Today warned Obama’s campaign to launch air strikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria will reduce the latter to a failed state.

U.S. partner Qatar fuels failed state plan in Libya.

“The turmoil in Libya is a cautionary tale as the United States enlists the help of moderate Syrian rebels to defeat the radical Islamic State and oust Syrian President Bashar Assad,” writes Oren Dorell for the newspaper. “As occurred in Libya, U.S. intervention to remove an anti-U.S. regime could lead to another failed state and more instability in the Middle East.”

In fact, the United States, Britain and Israel have colluded for years to turn the Middle East into a collection of failed states unable to rise above ethnic and tribal conflict.

The West has used a divide and rule formula in the Middle East for nearly a century. “Great Britain and France transformed what had been relatively quiet provinces of the Ottoman Empire into some of the least stable and internationally explosive states in the world,” writes Ayse Tekdal Fildis.

“A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” a policy document prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, at the time the Prime Minister of Israel, has served as a master plan for destabilizing the Arab and Muslim Middle East.

The plan calls for Israel to work “closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats,” most notably Syria. “Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.”

This is precisely what is now happening in Syria as “Arab tribes,” that is to say “tribes” of Salafist mercenaries supported by the U.S. and its Persian Gulf emirate partners, attack the Shia Alawite regime in Damascus.

Israel, as a settler state established in Palestine by United Nations mandate, of course takes its cues from the global elite and would not, without their continued support, be able to maintain a hegemonic hold in the Middle East.

“To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together,” writes Rockefeller operative and former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski.

For more in-depth detail on this, see our ISIS and the Plan to Balkanize the Middle East.

Exporting the Failed State Model

The State Department went before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs last week and said it is worried about Libyan Salafists tied to al-Qaeda expanding to neighboring countries and across the Middle East.

“We have concerns about the potential of Libyan militias Ansar al Shariah and others to continue to metastasize and spread to Algeria, Egypt… and spread to Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and other nations and become a serious security issue to the rest of the world,” said Gerald Feierstein, deputy assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs.

USA Today reports “Sudan, which shares a border with Libya, and Qatar are sending weapons and money to Islamist militias against U.S. wishes,” a statement that is patently untrue. The United States has supported the arming of al-Qaeda linked and inspired jihadist mercenaries, particularly in Syria.

Libya served as a beta test for Syria and, ultimately, the rest of the Arab Middle East. “The fact that the CIA was actively working to help the Libyan rebels topple Gaddafi was no secret, nor were the airstrikes that Obama ordered against the Libyan government. However, little was said about the identity or the ideological leanings of these Libyan rebels. Not surprising, considering the fact that the leader of the Libyan rebels later admitted that his fighters included Al-Qaeda linked jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq,” notes SCGNews.

Little, or rather virtually nothing, is said about the U.S. supporting, through its Gulf Emirate partners, al-Qaeda and its spin-offs, most notably ISIS, in Syria and northern Iraq. Instead, we are expected to believe failed states are a tragic result of humanitarian intervention. In order to remedy this, the State Department and the Obama administration argue in favor of more military action, not less.