The media and the governments of the NATO and CCG countries have altered their definition of the war on Syria, especially since the chemical weapons crisis and the convening of the Geneva II conference.

 Although the depiction of the Al-Assad administration is still unflattering, governments and media are showing a bit more respect: they abstain from all out slogans such as ’’Bashar must go !’’ and finally refer to the president by his surname (Assad or Al-Assad) instead of his first name (Bashar).

 These media and governments admit that their dream of a revolution in Syria is over. However, instead of recognizing that there never was a revolution against the central government, but an attack carried out by their own special forces, they choose to speak of a ’’second Syrian revolution’’ to describe the evolution taking place in the field. In this way, they attempt to explain why the population has sided with the government against the foreign jihadists.

 In 2011, these media and governments ascertained that the Free Syrian Army was made up of ’’deserters’’ from the Syrian Army. In 2012, experts admitted that the Al-Qaeda jihadists were the only efficient fighters within the ranks of the Free Syrian army. Then, in December 2012, Washington added the Al-Nusra Front to the list of terrorist organizations, to force its members to drop out of the Free Syrian Army. However, with the Geneva II conference on the horizon, the question of how representative they really are is in doubt. Currently, the West-backed Free Syrian Army are called ’’rebels.’’ On the other hand, Al-Qaeda forces which are supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are labeled ’’jihadists.’’ It remains to be proven that the ’’rebels’’ outnumber the ’’jihadists’’ and that the latter are being pushed back. A spin off effect happens to serve the purpose: the EIIL soldiers are currently retreating towards Iraq where they took Fallujah, thus leaving the way open for the phantasmic Free Syrian Army.

Alizée Ville