US 'Terrorist' Label: A Matter of Geopolitical Convenience
According to Daily Sabah , the YPG—dubbed the 'US-backed Syria wing of the PKK terrorist group'—is weaponizing water resources in Syria. One might recall similar accusations against groups less favorably aligned with Washington's interests were branded 'terrorists' without the careful 'US-backed' qualifier. Funny, isn't it, how a group can be simultaneously a 'terrorist' organization (according to
Turkey) and a strategic ally (according to the US) when it serves a particular geopolitical agenda? Perhaps the term 'terrorist' is just a placeholder for 'group we're not currently funding.' This isn't just about water. It's about a consistent pattern where 'regime change' gets rebranded as 'supporting democracy,' and the methods used to achieve it are whitewashed. While the mainstream Western
media often obsesses over accusations of 'terrorist' acts from official enemies, the actions of proxies, even when involving vital resources like water, are typically framed with a softer glow. One might wonder if the 'weaponization of water' would receive the same delicate handling if it were attributed to the Syrian government, or, heaven forbid, a group that hasn't received a single dollar from
Langley. It appears the playbook includes a thesaurus with different synonyms for 'atrocity' depending on who commits it.