By 
Phil GreavesA recent interview given by: an ‘anonymous’ Qatari security  official, has shed further light on CIA-led covert arms shipments to  militants fighting in Syria. In this Reuters article, the security official and several ‘anonymous’ rebel Commanders  confirm that Qatar has “tightened coordination of arms flows [plural]  to Syria,” under alleged concern of weapons ending up in the hands of Al  Qaeda linked Islamic extremist militants; the very militants as noted previously, that have continually formed the spearhead of the insurgency against the Syrian Government: 
 “Rebel fighters in Syria say that  in recent months the system for distributing arms has become more  centralized, with arms being delivered through opposition National  Coalition’s General Command, led by Selim Idriss, a general who defected  to the opposition and is a favorite of Washington.”(my emphasis)
 What has been long confirmed by ‘official sources’ in the mainstream  press, is that these arms shipments commenced in at least “early 2012″.  We can be sure, as with the majority of the official timeline, that  leeway has been given in these statements: its highly likely smaller  arms shipments/smuggling into Syria started much earlier. Statements from eyewitnesses in Libya confirm that arms shipments from the port of  Libyan Islamic Fighting Group stronghold Misrata, commenced rapidly  after the fall of Gaddafi. Sibel Edmonds also reported in November 2011,  long before any corporate media revealed, that the CIA, along with its  Turkish and NATO counterparts had been working from the “nerve centre” at the joint US-Turkish air-base in Incerlik, Turkey, since April/May  of 2011, coordinating ‘rebel’ elements and ‘activist’s’. Edmonds posits  the likely theory that this was one of the initial staging grounds used  by the CIA and its regional partners, to smuggle weapons, fighters and  materiel into Syria as the insurgency took hold.
 Enough of this background information, ‘official sources’ and  timeline discrepancies gives the impression that the ‘news’ media is not  releasing information when it receives it, and is holding back crucial  pieces of the timeline, to fit into the desired narrative of “Assad  forces killing peaceful protesters”.
 What we learn from the Reuters report is that until Qatar (acting  directly under CIA auspices) chose to “tighten” the coordination of  their arms supplies into Syria, there was no coherent or structured way  of the arms being distributed once they reached the Syrian border:
 “The Qataris are now [May 2013]  going through the Coalition for aid and humanitarian issues and for  military issues they are going through the military command,” a  commander in northern Syria interviewed from Beirut said.
 This raises the immediate question: who were Qatar (under CIA  auspices) distributing the arms thousands of tonnes of arms to before  April 2013?  The report goes on to state:
 “Before the Coalition was formed they were going through liaison offices and other military and civil formations. That was at the beginning. Now it is different – it is all going through the Coalition and the military command.”
 “There’s a lot of consultation with the CIA,  and they help Qatar with buying and moving the weapons into Syria, but  just as consultants,” he said. The CIA declined to comment. (my emphasis)
 At least a pinch of salt needs to be taken with this piece of  misinformation. What exactly are “liaison offices, military and civil  formations?” The ‘opposition’ has never had anything resembling a  military formation. Regardless, this raises several important questions  and draws several distinctions into the timeline of the Syrian conflict.
 We have long known, the main supplier of arms to ‘rebels’ was and  still is Qatar, acting directly under the CIA’s “consultation”. We also  know that these arms shipments became a considerable amount in “early  2012″ and continued to rise in both quantity and frequency. A New York Times investigation  confirmed this to be the case, reporting that eighty-five military  cargo planes flew from Qatar to Turkey carrying arms bound for Syria  between January 2012 and March 2013. (the maximum load of an average  military cargo plane is around 50-60 tonnes.)  What other synonymous  distinctions in the conflict do we know about, that commenced and  progressed from “early 2012″?
 The clearest and most glaring dynamic that occurred along this  timeframe, and also continued to rise and greatly increase, is both the  death toll, and displacement within Syria. As covered extensively before, the monthly death toll in Syria almost doubled in “early 2012″,  and continued to rapidly increase. All available resources and  ‘activist’ or opposition groups death toll figures roughly confirm this,  as can be seen in this graph compiled by Reuters:
 
 One other critical factor is directly synonymous with both the arms  flow increase, (under CIA/Qatari auspices) and the huge rise in death  toll. That being: the success, proliferation and bolstering of Jabhat al  Nusra and similar Salafi/Jihaddi militant groups. Jabhat al Nusra, or,  as they are now known: the Islamic State of Iraq and Al Sham, (ISIS)  were active in Syria under their ‘parent’ group the Islamic State of  Iraq’s (Al Qaeda in Iraq – AQI) auspices for years prior to the Syrian  uprising. Indeed, ever since the formation of AQI itself the eastern  regions of Syria, (bordering the west of Iraq and the Anbar province)  have been a hotbed for Al Qaeda activity since its inception following  the US invasion in 2003.
 It is beyond doubt that Jabhat al Nusra and other Salafi/Jihaddi groups working alongside them have been the driving force of the armed insurgency. Throughout the majority of the armed conflict,  it has been Jabhat al Nusra that has led insurgent attacks on key  Syrian military installations; air-defense bases; coastal and major  highway routes in attempts to block SAA supply lines; the vast majority  of suicide attacks in civilian areas; and assassinations on key  Government security officials. These extremist groups have become the  best equipped, most organised, consistently well-funded and importantly,  the most successful on the ground. While the US and its Gulf allies  claim to have only armed, trained and supported ‘vetted’ and ‘moderate’  rebels, the reality inside Syria bears absolutely no resemblance to  these claims.
 We are now left with some theoretical options, first: the CIA will  claim, as the US administration has been claiming, that they only  ‘coordinated’ arms to, and supported moderate groups; how they found  their way to extremists is beyond the CIA remit. Thus passing sole  culpability to Qatar or the smugglers in Turkey that transported the  arms into Syria. Again, the Qatari intelligence service can also claim  plausible deniability, passing the buck to smugglers and rebels  controlling the flow on the Turkish border. Do the ramifications of this  policy, even if it were true, absolve the sheer recklessness of it and  the evident destruction and bolstering of extremists it has permitted?
 Another probable outcome, or denial of association with these groups  will be that the Syrian Arab Army and the Syrian Government, because of  the alleged majority Alawhite leadership, made a conscious decision  toinstill sectarianism into the conflict in order to quell the protest  movement. When one takes a close look at the Syrian Governments  overtures toward the peaceful protest movement, and concessions the  Assad government made during the early stages of protests, it is again,  hard to see any reality to confirm it was Assad’s intention to divide  Syria and start a full-scale sectarian war. Indeed, many concessions  were made, including; mass political prisoner releases; a new  constitution promising political plurality and maximum presidential  terms; the dismissal of several regional governors and the complete  dismissal of the Syrian Cabinet. These concessions do not bear the  hallmark of a leader looking to marginalize his countries largest  demographic. In which the Sunni population was, and still is heavily  represented in both the Government and the army.
 What is most probable, is that the CIA, along with its Qatari  partners, knew full well of the ideologues they were arming and  bolstering and chose to pursue this policy; simply because it was the  most effective at weakening the Syrian Army and dividing the peaceful,  multi-ethnic fabric of Syrian society. As stated above, it is Jabhat al  Nusra leading the fight in Syria, it is they that have taken out Syria’s  air defense bases, on many an occasion. What threat anti-aircraft  missiles and defense radar’s pose to small, lightly armed insurgent  groups is hard to fathom, suggesting these groups were acting on outside  orders, or state supplied intelligence provided to them with the  desired outcome of weakening Syria’s strategic defense capabilities.
 For those that study the US governments unrelenting attempts of subversion and destabilization, this tactic of fomenting and supporting Islamic extremists militants will  come as no surprise. It is not just Jabhat al Nusra’s (AQI) tactical  capability and battle experience that has pushed them into the  leadership role, without money and weapons, and indeed psychological  appeal to win recruits, experience means nothing.
 These groups, supposedly of “Al Qaeda” origin, an ideology in itself,  more than a coherent functioning group capable of international war;  form the sectarian “shock troops” the US and their allies long ago agreed upon to foment and support in their attempts to block the “resistance”  within the “Shiite crescent,” and have quite literally, grown beyond all  means of control. Qatar (under CIA “consultation”) has tacitly  encouraged, sponsored and armed the very same groups that are prominent  now: those of an extremist Salafi/Jihaddi ideology that espouse  sectarian hatred against Shia and minority groups to promote division  and social chaos. This supposedly happened directly under the CIA’s  nose, with their tacit “consultation” and they failed to notice this  extremist dynamic developing and rapidly expanding? Another possible  added bonus for the US and its allies was recently pointed out by  Lebanese political commentator Dr. Asad Abu Khalil who noted:
 by listing Nusrah Front as a terrorist organization, the  US government has basically licensed all other Syrian armed groups to  engage in all sorts of war crimes.  So all an armed group has to do to  get away with war crimes, is merely to fly the flag of Nusrah.  That is  all what it takes.  So an armed group belonging to the Free Syrian Army  umbrella, for example, can engage in a war crime, and then the next day  issue a condemnation.  It is an unlimited license for war crimes.
 A fully fledged and totally malleable proxy fighting force, promoting  subversion, sectarian division, and outright chaos to gain the desired  US objective of the destruction of the Syrian state, ergo: removing a key ally of Iran,  and the resistance to western hegemony in the Middle East. When the  extremism and brutality become too exposed to allow overt western  support, the US designate them “terrorists”, and within a change of  clothes, they become the falsehood that is the “FSA”.
 Phil Greaves is a UK based writer/analyst, focusing on UK/US Foreign Policy and conflict analysis in the Middle East post WWII. http://notthemsmdotcom.wordpress.com/