Innehållet i denna artikel är kanske en chock för några, och bara en betraktelse på vad man redan vet för andra.
Den är skriven av den politiske reportern Ben Norton. Israelisk tankesmedja:Bra ha kvar Is Följs av efterskrift av mig.

Artikeln.
Head of a right-wing think tank Efraim Inbar says the existence of ISIS serves a ”strategic purpose” in the West’s interests
Inbar was a member of the political strategic committee for Israel’s National Planning Council, a member of the academic committee of the Israeli military’s history department and the chair of the committee for the national security curriculum at the Ministry of Education.
He also has a prestigious academic record, having taught at Johns Hopkins and Georgetown and lectured at Harvard, MIT, Columbia, Oxford and Yale. Inbar served as a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and was appointed as a Manfred Wörner NATO fellow.
Inbar is the director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, a think tank that says its mission is to advance “a realist, conservative, and Zionist agenda in the search for security and peace for Israel.”

The think tank, known by its acronym BESA, is affiliated with Israel’s Bar Ilan University and has been supported by the Israeli government, the NATO Mediterranean Initiative, the U.S. embassy in Israel and the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs.
According to a think tank that does contract work for NATO and the Israeli government, the West should not destroy ISIS, the Islamist extremist group that is committing genocide and ethnically cleansing minority groups in Syria and Iraq.
Why? The so-called Islamic State “can be a useful tool in undermining” Iran, Hezbollah, Syria and Russia, argues the think tank’s director.

“The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose,” wrote in “The Destruction of Islamic State Is a Strategic Mistake,” a paper published on Aug. 2.

By cooperating with Russia to fight the genocidal extremist group, the United States is committing a “strategic folly” that will “enhance the power of the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis,” Inbar argued. “The West should seek the further weakening of Islamic State, but not its destruction,” he added. “A weak IS is preferable to a destroyed IS.”

Inbar suggested that it would be a good idea to prolong the war in Syria, which has destroyed the country, killing hundreds of thousands of people and displacing more than half the population.
As for the argument that defeating ISIS would make the Middle East more stable, Inbar maintained: “Stability is not a value in and of itself. It is desirable only if it serves our interests.”

Inbar stressed that the West’s “main enemy” is not the self-declared Islamic State; it is Iran. He accused the Obama administration of “inflat[ing] the threat from IS in order to legitimize Iran as a ‘responsible’ actor that will, supposedly, fight IS in the Middle East.”

Despite Inbar’s claims, Iran is a mortal enemy of ISIS, particularly because the Iranian government is founded on Shia Islam, a branch that the Sunni extremists of ISIS consider a form of apostasy. ISIS and its affiliates have massacred and ethnically cleansed Shia Muslims in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.
If the Syrian government survives, Inbar argued, “Many radical Islamists in the opposition forces, i.e., Al Nusra and its offshoots, might find other arenas in which to operate closer to Paris and Berlin.” Jabhat al-Nusra is Syria’s al-Qaida affiliate, and one of the most powerful rebel groups in the country. (It recently changed its name to Jabhat Fatah al-Sham.)

Several days after Inbar’s paper was published, David M. Weinberg, director of public affairs at the BESA Center, wrote a similarly-themed op-ed titled “Should ISIS be wiped out?” in Israel Hayom, a free and widely read right-wing newspaper funded by conservative billionaire Sheldon Adelson that strongly favors the agenda of Israel’s right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Weinberg defended his colleague’s argument and referred to ISIS as a “useful idiot.” He called the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran “rotten” and argued that Iran and Russia pose a “far greater threat than the terrorist nuisance of Islamic State.”
Weinberg has worked extensively with the Israeli government.

The strategy Inbar and Weinberg have proposed is reminiscent of the U.S. Cold War policy of supporting far-right Islamist extremists in order to fight communists and left-wing nationalists.

In the war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the CIA and U.S. allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia armed, trained and funded Islamic fundamentalists in their fight against the Soviet Union and Afghanistan’s Soviet-backed socialist government. These U.S.-backed rebels, known as the mujahideen, were the predecessors of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

In the 1980s, Israel supported right-wing Islamist groups like Hamas in order to undermine the Palestine Liberation Organization, or PLO, a coalition of various left-wing nationalist and communist political parties.
“Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” Avner Cohen, a retired Israeli official who worked in Gaza for more than 20 years, told The Wall Street Journal.

As far back as 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower insisted to the CIA that, in order to fight leftist movements in the Middle East, “We should do everything possible to stress the ‘holy war’ aspect.”

Efterskrift
Israel har sedan tidigare engagerat sig i kriget i Syrien bl.a.

Jag har nämnt att Israel vill annektera Syriens Golanhöjder efter oljefynd och till och med påstått att
Cheney, Rothschild och Murdoch vill stjäla Syriens olja. En gästbloggare hävdade Israel störste köparen av olja från IS. I december 2013 skrev jag ”Enligt en rapport nyligen i nyhetsbyrån Fars News deltog för kanske första gången Israels armé aktivt på rebellernas sida vid strider i östra Ghota utanför Damaskus. Enligt tidningen har israelisk militär försett rebellerna, som domineras av al-Qaida-styrkor, med spaningskartor och foton om den syriska armén positioner. Rebellerna kom från Jordanien under en samordnad ledning av Saudiarabien, USA och Israel” Israel och Saudiarabien angriper 2013
Den 5 maj 2015 skrev DN ”I skydd av mörkret anföll Israel Syrien tidigt på söndagen. Al-Assad-regimen hävdar att detta är den israeliska militärens andra attack på lika många dagar, denna gång mot den militära forskningsanläggningen Jamraya på Jabal Qasiun alldeles utanför huvudstaden Damaskus.”
Världens massmedia (och denna blogg) rapporterade 31 januari 2013 att Israel utan krigsförklaring angripit Syrien efter att ha informerat USA dessförinnan. Svenska Dagbladet skrev ”Krigstillståndet mellan Syrien och Israel går 65 år tillbaka i tiden och är en sannolikt försummad aspekt på kriget. Man kan uppfatta att Israel ibland är USA:s bepansrade näve i Mellanöstern, men man agerar också självständigt, ibland sannolikt mot USA:s omedelbara intressen, men knappast utan att i förväg informera USA som vid detta angrepp eller angreppen på försvarslösa i Gaza.

i Andra om: ISIS, imperialism,al-Nusra, Israel, Syrien, USA, politik, al-Qaida, terrorism, extremism