The U.S. plans for changing the Middle East into a "New Middle East" that favors their foreign policy and economic interests have been in the making for a long time. Some plans have been executed, like Afghanistan and Iraq, which have been part of the agenda. Iran is also a key interest, as is Syria where the agenda is currently being pushed.
Recent WikiLeaks, new and buried old ones, have come to light to expose the corrupt weapons dealings of Western governments in the Middle East. France and Germany have been exposed for their corruption and bribery in selling arms to UAE of the Saudi coalition that attacked Yemen. The U.S. has ignored civilian deaths from the Saudi coalition in order to keep the bombs and money flowing. The U.S. has also been shown to be undermining Assad and the Syrian government since 2011 from recently uncovered old WikiLeaks from the USMC Intelligence Department.
This New World Order agenda to remake a "New Middle East" is going more-or-less as plan. The current undeclared war on Syria by the West was in the making according to a document classified as SECRET from 2006. The document was a cable sent with the subject "INFLUENCING THE SARG IN THE END OF 2006", as part of WikiLeaks' release of 251,287 classified State Department cable in 2010. SARG means Syrian Arab Republic Government. The cable was sent to "The White House, U.S. Secretary of State, U.S. Treasury, U.S. Mission at the UN, U.S. National Security Council, CENTCOM, all Arab League and EU countries".
This document shows how long in the making imperialist plans to take on the Syrian government to impose a regime change have been talked about in private and secrecy within the US government. It demonstrates that the claims of helping civilians and democracy in Syria are a public farce meant to string along the American and Western public into supporting attacks on the Syrian government. As the recent post on buried WikiLeaks from the USMC Intelligence Department in 2011 showed, the U.S. if more concerned with Syria's relationship to Iran than with it's own people and alleged human rights issues. This secret cable shows the same.
The first instance of an attack on Syria by the U.S. was in 2013, with then President Obama saying it would be a one time deal as a response and punishment for a chemical weapon attack that the U.S. blamed on the Syrian government. The publicly stated goal was not to overthrow the Assad government nor to affect the civil war. But this wasn't the real end game. Going as far back as 1997, military elements have spoken about their plans for a New World Order. One terrible character named Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters laid out a vision for the future of the world:
There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing.
...
The next century will indeed be American, but it will also be troubled. We will find ourselves in constant conflict, much of it violent.
Does that sounds familiar since 2001, 4 years after he wrote that? Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters words came when he was in charge of future warfare at the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. He appears to have set the playbook for the future we are living in now.
The aim of so-called "intervention" is not to help the people of a country, like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, or Syria. The aim is not to keep them safe, but to keep the foreign policy and economic interests of the U.S. safe. Death-dealing is the chosen method by which the New World Order is to be brought about.
Fast forward to 2006, after Iraq and Afghanistan, the Director for the Office of the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, William Roebuck, wrote an end of year strategy for Syria from the U.S. Embassy in Damascus, Syria. This is the 2006 cable "INFLUENCING THE SARG IN THE END OF 2006".
The WikiLeaks document of this cable outlines some "vulnerabilities" about Syria that Roebuck put forth, and ways to "exploit" them "to put pressure on the regime." As sates in paragraph 2 of the cable:
Actions that cause Bashar to lose balance, and increase his insecurity, are in our interest.
Undermine the Syrian government was the goal, and Roebuck had a plan on how to do it. The main points were about "the conflict between economic reform steps (however limited) and entrenched, corrupt forces, the Kurdish question, and the potential threat to the regime from the increasing presence of transiting Islamist extremists."
Roebuck was particularly interested in Assad's concern with "Syria,s dignity and its international reputation are put in question." His thinking was that making Syria look bad would lead to Assad's government making "mistakes and ill-judged policy decisions through trademark emotional reactions to challenges, providing us with new opportunities." These "opportunities" would be to exploit the "vulnerabilities" and help topple the Assad "inner circle" rule of Syria in order to promote U.S. interests in the area.
The Syrian relationship with Iran was also a "vulnerability" that they saw as an "opportunity" to "exploit":
-- Vulnerability:
-- THE ALLIANCE WITH TEHRAN: Bashar is walking a fine line in his increasingly strong relations with Iran, seeking necessary support while not completely alienating Syria,s moderate Sunni Arab neighbors by being perceived as aiding Persian and fundamentalist Shia interests. Bashar's decision to not attend the Talabani ) Ahmadinejad summit in Tehran following FM Moallem,s trip to Iraq can be seen as a manifestation of Bashar's sensitivity to the Arab optic on his Iranian alliance.
-- Possible action:
-- PLAY ON SUNNI FEARS OF IRANIAN INFLUENCE: There are fears in Syria that the Iranians are active in both Shia proselytizing and conversion of, mostly poor, Sunnis. Though often exaggerated, such fears reflect an element of the Sunni community in Syria that is increasingly upset by and focused on the spread of Iranian influence in their country through activities ranging from mosque construction to business. Both the local Egyptian and Saudi missions here, (as well as prominent Syrian Sunni religious leaders), are giving increasing attention to the matter and we should coordinate more closely with their governments on ways to better publicize and focus regional attention on the issue.
This is what the 2011 USMC WikiLeak exposed as well. These are two documents which show the secret conspiratorial intent within the U.S. government to undermine Syria in an effort to create a "New Middle East". It was all being hatched up before the first attack on Syria by the Obama administration in 2013, back into the Bush administration, and earlier than that. They seem to think the world is theirs to do with as they please.
Promoting a Sunni-Shia sectarian war is just what the U.S. did, despite Obama's claims to only be "punishing" Assad for allegedly attacking his own people with a chemical weapon, and not getting involved. They were always going to get involved. Using a chemical attack and blaming it on the Syrian government was just the way to get their foot in the door with the rest of their agenda to follow.
Even Syria's actions against extremist groups was to be used as a way to emphasize the Syrian governments "vulnerability" and further degrade their integrity:
Publicize Syrian efforts against extremist groups in a way that suggests weakness, signs of instability, and uncontrolled blowback. The SARG,s argument (usually used after terror attacks in Syria) that it too is a victim of terrorism should be used against it to give greater prominence to increasing signs of instability within Syria.
The U.S. seems to have gone further than these initial proposals, and have been funding various terror-groups in Syria under the guise of helping civilians, the "justice" of their "civil war" and ensuring "democracy" prevail against Assad's government.
Fanning the flames of sectarian conflict was known to be a recipe for disaster, at least for the home country it was being done in, and it's citizens. And they knew it. Just look at Iraq. This strategy could be used to not only destroy the Syrian government, but also the Syrian society itself, like what happened in Iraq. The only one's this was good for was the U.S. and the plans for a New Middle East and a New World Order.
The plan laid out in the cable by Roebuck did not cause a heated controversy in various political circles at the time. On the contrary, the future we're living in now shows us it was seen as a "good idea" that was carried out. The U.S. is still trying to help the chaos-creating "moderate rebels", i.e. terrorists, in their efforts to remove Assad from power. They haven't achieved their goals yet, as Iran and Russia has been helping the Syrian government regain control of their nation as the U.S. and Western allies continue to batter them with bombs.
References:
- INFLUENCING THE SARG IN THE END OF 2006
- Syria: A Conspiracy Revealed
- Constant Conflict
- Old WikiLeaks Shows U.S. Wanted to Undermine Democratic Syria in Order to Weaken Iran, Didn't Care About Civilians
- Aggressively Pursued Regime Change in Syria, Igniting a Bloodbath
This was an entry for Deep Dives Research Challenge 7 | Wikileaks Archive.
Thanks to 
Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
me for more content to come!
My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page.