Press Release
Indeed Brahimi, The Syrian Crisis is the Most Dangerous Crisis in the World! Because It will Culminate with the Establishment of the Righteous Khalifah, Allah willing
(Translated)

On Friday 10th of April 2013, Lakhdar Brahimi called for the International Security Council to unify its position to stop the conflict in Syria, announcing that the Syrian conflict is the most dangerous conflict in the world. This announcement coincided with the many statements from American administration officials warning against arming the rebels in ash-Sham, fearing that the arms would fall into the hands of extremists. Likewise, as revealed in The Wall Street Journal article that high-ranking officials in the Obama administration had surprised some of the representatives and allies in the latest weeks with a modified vision pertaining to the Syrian revolution: They do not want a decisive military victory for the rebels now, because they believe, according to one of the high officials, that "the good guys" would not come out on top and they would not be at the forefront. And the report quoted officials as saying that it would take minute maneuvering to curb the influence of extremists and buy time to strengthen the moderate rebels that the Western governments hope to assume leadership if they can convince President Assad to leave. John Kerry said before the US Senate that "we are trying to advance carefully to make sure that we do not cause more chaos," adding that "the extremists that are receiving funds and are taking part in the battle surely constitute a danger, and we have to try to exclude them if possible."

While the German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle confirmed that "the Syrian opposition should distance itself from the terrorist and extremist forces." And even France, which had previously called for the lift of the arms embargo that had been ordered by the European Union on Syria, insisting that it was the only guaranteed procedure to outweigh the military balance in interest of the opposition, declined, considering that the conditions are on the ground "not available" to deliver weapons." And the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius warned before the deputy members of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament in Strasbourg: "If we let the situation continue, Syria will face the risk of disintegration that will result in its split from the fallout on the regional level, where the crisis will not be a local Syrian problem, if we assume that the division of Syrians has not yet begun. Under such a circumstance, the extremist will be the victors," and he warned "If the militant groups that are loyal to Al-Qaida are able to reach the heart of the balance of power, then the risk of instability will reach Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey. One has to consider that the consequences will also reach the front of the Arab-Israeli conflict." The Prime Minister of the Jewish entity Benjamin Netanyahu has warned in a statement against a rebel takeover: "The weapons present in Syria, and these are the anti-aircraft weapons, chemical weapons and other extremely dangerous weapons, could change the rules of the game," and he added, "they are going to change the conditions, they are going to change the balance of power in the Middle East.. They could pose a terrorist threat on a global level."

The prudent observer has the right to question: What are the links between all these positions? Why did we not hear something from the Arab Spring uprisings that preceded in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen? And what has distinguished the Syrian Revolution from the others??

And the answer: In the previous uprisings the West had succeeded in its containment and riding of the wave and controlling its course, and they have failed, until now, to break the dependency on the western countries, and there was the formulation of a new "Revolutionary" covenant that does not constitute a threat to Western interests, and does not present a civilized model that the people of the world would aspire to wrest itself from the tragedies of the Western World Order. Had the leaders of the West been able to find a "Karzai" to hold the reigns of the revolution in Syria and guarantee the formulation of the period after the Assad regime to serve their own interest, the issue would not have required two years of bloody repression that has been unseen before in history, except for its precedent Nero who lacked scud Scot missiles, and even Stalin did not use rockets over the heads of its people in Russian cities...

But their declarations, which we have conveyed a side of, reveal the truth of their fear that the Sham revolution will be successful in that which the uprisings of the Arab Spring had failed: Namely, the establishment of a Caliphate state that will break the dependency on the Western Countries, and liberate the Ummah from its colonization, and raise the banner of Tawheed, There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and will build the Islamic society to be the world's Qiblah, and there is nothing which Allah cannot overcome.

Finally, we assure them all that the Khilafah "Caliphate" is imminent with Allah's Will. And entire region of ash-Sham will be under the authority of the coming Khilafah "Caliphate", Insha'Allah.

Osman Bakhach
Director of The Central Media Office
of Hizb ut Tahrir