The Syria Thread 2011 - Present

[seemslikeadream]

Syria in 2016 Will be Like the Balkans in 1914
Explosive violence breaks out on an international scale
PATRICK COCKBURN • DECEMBER 12, 2015 • 1,200 WORDS • 43 COMMENTS • REPLY

The CIA analyst is confident about what is likely to happen in Syria. He says that “Assad is playing his last major card to keep his regime in power”. He believes that the Assad government will step up its efforts to prove that its enemies “are being manipulated by outsiders”. The probable outcome is a split within Syria’s ruling elite leading to Assad being ousted, though he admits that there is no obvious replacement for him.

The reasoning in the CIA special analysis, entitled “Syria: Assad’s Prospects”, is sensible and convincing, though overconfident that Assad’s days are numbered. The extent of this overconfidence is highlighted by a glance at the date of the document, which is 17 March 1980, or 35 years ago, and the President Assad, whose imminent political demise is predicted as likely, is not Bashar al-Assad but his father, Hafez al-Assad, who died in 2000. The analysis was released by the CIA under the Freedom of Information Act in 2013.

The CIA paper is an interesting read, not least because it shows how many ingredients of the present crisis in Syria have been present for decades, but had not yet come together in the explosive mix which produced the present horrific war. In 1980, the writer assumed that Syrian politics revolved largely around the sectarian differences between the Alawites, the Muslim sect to which the Assads and Syria’s rulers generally belong, and the Sunni Arab majority. The analysis is written in an upbeat tone as it forecasts that splits between the two communities may bring Assad down.

The CIA certainly wanted Assad gone and had some ideas about how this might be achieved. “Army discipline may well collapse in the face of widespread riots,” it says. “This could lead to bloody war between Sunni Muslim and Alawite units. The Alawites, however, may choose to topple Assad before such turmoil develops in order to keep their position secure.”

This last sentence could have been written at any time since 2011 as a summary of what the US would have liked to happen in Syria: it has always wanted to get rid of Assad, but it does not intend to destroy or even weaken the Syrian state and thereby open the door to Isis and al-Qaeda. Even super-powers sometimes learn from history, so the US and its Western allies today hope to avoid a repeat of the disastrous disintegration of Iraq state institutions in 2003 after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Tragically, the unnamed CIA analyst eventually got the sectarian civil war he had half-hoped for, but Assad is still there and Syrian people have got the worst of all possible worlds.

US intelligence chiefs are far more outspoken these days than their counterparts in Britain about the calamitous consequences of US-led foreign interventions over the past 12 years. None more so than General Michael Flynn, recently retired head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm, who says bluntly in an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel that the Iraq war “was a huge error. As brutal as Saddam Hussein was, it was a mistake to just eliminate him. The same is true for Muammar Gaddafi and for Libya, which is now a failed state. The historic lesson is that it was a strategic failure to get into Iraq. History will not be and should not be kind to that decision.”

Big players such as the US can more easily afford to admit mistakes than those, like Britain, which are smaller and lacking in confidence about their great-power status. But there is a price to be paid for remaining mute or in denial about past political, military and diplomatic errors. If it is admitted that anything went wrong for Britain in the Iraq, Afghan, Libyan and Syrian wars then it is only in the most general terms. A former diplomat at the Foreign Office says that it was striking how in the years following the Iraq invasion of 2003, he heard “almost nobody in the Foreign Office talk about the decision to go to war or what went wrong”. This may have been because most officials privately opposed the war from the beginning as a bad idea, but did not want to say this publicly, or even within the office.

It is a natural British personal and institutional instinct to hush things up, but after four wars marked by British government blunders and misjudgements, it is curious that information from the intelligence services is not treated with greater scepticism. A recent sign of this was David Cameron justifying his unlikely claim that there are 70,000 moderate anti-Assad fighters in Syria by saying that this figure came from the Joint Intelligence Committee, as if this sourcing put its accuracy beyond doubt. It may be that endless harping on British success in breaking German codes in both world wars has combined with a diet of James Bond movies to exaggerate the reputation of British intelligence.

Foreign political leaders are often more dubious about what their intelligence services really know. Before the start of the Iraq war in 2003, President Jacques Chirac told a visitor that he did not believe that Saddam had any weapons of mass destruction. The visitor said: “Mr President, your own intelligence people think so.” Chirac replied: “They intoxicate each other.” In other words, intelligence services often become echo chambers for obsessive beliefs that are detached from reality.

The very secrecy with which they shroud themselves is useful when denying responsibility for failure. It also makes them vulnerable when governments or their own senior officers want to suppress or doctor politically inconvenient advice.

Early last year, President Barack Obama dismissed Isis, which was beginning to make spectacular advances, as being like a junior basketball team wanting to play in the big leagues. Soon after, it captured most of northern Iraq and eastern Syria. One of the reasons this may have happened was exposed this year when 50 intelligence analysts working for the Pentagon signed a joint letter of protest. They said that their intelligence findings that Isis was getting stronger and not weaker as the White House claimed, were being suppressed or doctored by their chiefs.

This was par for the course. The personal or institutional interests of the heads of intelligence agencies or any other government department are seldom served by bringing bad or contradictory news to those who decide on budgets and promotions. Most of the time this does not matter but today it does, because the stakes are rising in the war in Syria and Iraq. Knowledge of what is happening on the ground should be at a premium.

Serious powers such as Russia and Turkey are being sucked in and have invested too much of their prestige and credibility to pull back or suffer a defeat. Their vital interests become plugged into obscure but violent local antagonisms, such as those between Russian-backed Kurds and Turkish-backed Turkomans, through whose lands run the roads supplying Aleppo. The Syrian-Iraqi conflict has become to the 21st century what the Balkan wars were to the 20th. In terms of explosive violence on an international scale, 2016 could be our 1914.

[parel]

Syria: ‘Moderate Rebel’ Massacres and Everyday Propaganda

By Prof. Tim Anderson
Global Research, December 16, 2015


Sadly, eyes often glaze over at the latest massacre in Syria, because the story is so repetitive. But what story? A double massacre by ‘moderate rebels’ in Homs and Damascus, and the subsequent re-spinning of the story, show the wall of disinformation we face.

Through an agreement with the Syrian Government, on 8 December, hundreds of what the western media has come to call “anti-Assad rebels” (a mixture of Syrian and Jabhat al Nusra terrorists) and their families were bussed out of the last part of occupied Homs city.

They were sent to northern Idlib, to join their colleagues in another sectarian coalition called the ‘Army of Conquest’, sent in from Turkey eight months ago and currently being battered back by Russian bombing and a Syrian Army counter-offensive.

Two days later, as a parting shot, the terrorists detonated two bombs in the al-Zahra district of the city. The Governor of Homs, Talal al-Barazi, told the Syrian News Agency (SANA) that 16 people has been killed and 54 others injured, some of them critically.

The first explosion was said to have been from a suicide car bomber; the second was in a nearby shop a few minutes later. Although al-Zahra is home to minorities, the victims of such bombings are quite random.

ISIS claimed responsibility, but that means little as the group alternately works with the others or competes for the ‘credit’ of each new massacre. Ordinary Syrians pay little attention to the various brand names of terrorist groups.

A day later, on 13 December, a friend in Damascus sent me these phone messages:

“Rockets came down on my building today … and one across the road … I’m on the other side of the building but I’m sure it landed in someone’s bedroom while they were asleep … I’ve been told to stay inside.”

Where did the rockets come from, I asked?

“I don’t know, but they’re still coming”.

Later on she confirms they are coming from Jobar, notorious for its mortar attacks on the capital and now a wasteland next to Douma, an outer north-eastern suburb of Damascus which the Islamic Front and Jabhat al Nusra have jointly occupied for at least three years.

Recent stories that the Syrian Airforce was ‘barrel bombing’ civilians in Douma were quite false. The last large evacuations of civilians, well publicised, were in January 2015. Syria was bombing hated terrorist groups.

I told my friend I had read that Russian planes responded by bombing Douma. “Good … but they did take a while to go out. Mortars started at 7am, planes came out at 8.30, probably because there was heaps of fog … many [were] killed”. She went on “smashed cars and broken glass are all around my neighbourhood … it was a massacre.”

I asked her which areas were hit. “Malki, Abu Rummani, Bab Touma, Jisr al Raes (President’s bridge), Sharq Hospital, [and] Ain al Karesh where students were targeted” she responded.

The Syrian News Agency, picked up by Iran’s Press TV, gave these details:

“At least three civilians, including a child, have been killed in a series of attacks carried out by foreign-sponsored Takfiri militants against residential areas in Syria’s capital city of Damascus … Separately, two civilians were killed and 30 others were injured when mortar shells fired by militants struck the al-Wafideen Camp (Damascus countryside). Most of the victims are said to be school students.”

Several other sites were hit.

I went to check western media stories, searching for ‘rockets’ and ‘Damascus’. There was a flood of stories (from AFP to Antiwar.Com) saying that “civilians including children” had been killed by the Russian attacks on Douma. However there were virtually no stories on the actual attacks on civilians in Damascus, but for one which mentioned “tit for tat” attacks.

The ‘Antiwar.com‘ story read:

“At least 45 civilians were reported killed today, including 10 children, as a flurry of rocket fire out of Syrian military-held territory rained down on the Eastern Ghouta region, the suburb of Damascus which remains in rebel hands.”

The terrorist HQ seems to have an endless supply of children and civilians.

This story, as all the others, had as its main source the ‘Syrian Observatory for Human Rights’ (SOHR), a single Muslim Brotherhood man Rami Abdul Rahman, based in Coventry, England. A bitter opponent of the Syrian Government, he flies the flag of the armed FSA groups on his website.

In English-language media terms, the terrorist attacks on Damascus had virtually disappeared. In their place the military response to terrorist atrocities was presented as a slaughter of civilians and children. The toxic marriage of sectarian sources and western media, once again, turned events on their head. Sectarian fanatics became innocent victims, while the actual civilian casualties disappeared into thin air.

Such is the disinformation of the dirty war on Syria.

[AlicetheKurious]

Pathetic. The Zio-American empire is so naked.

Bombing plagiarism? Russia says Western media use its Syria footage in coverage of US-led coalition
Published time: 17 Dec, 2015 04:26

Western media often use videos from Russia’s anti-terror campaign in Syria to depict airstrikes by the US-led coalition. This is due to the coalition’s reluctance to share more information about its operations, a Russian Defense Ministry spokesman said.
Unlike the Russian anti-terror operation command in Syria, the US-led coalition has not organized coverage for journalists in the region. “I have to stress that no-one has ever heard of the reporters’ press-tours to the anti-ISIS coalition’s bases,” Major General Igor Konashenkov told journalists in Latakia, Syria on Wednesday.

“As a result even the most reliable international TV channels – I am sure unintentionally – are often using the footage of Russian airstrikes to illustrate the airstrikes by the anti-ISIS coalition,” he said.

For example, Konashenkov said, the Euronews TV channel recently used Russian Air Force footage while airing a comment by a representative of US Central Command, who was speaking about the successes of the anti-ISIS coalition.


© PBS NewsHour Epic bombing fail? PBS uses Russian footage to depict US airstrikes on ISIS oil fields

Last month, PBS NewsHour used two Russian objective control videos which showed Sukhoi bombers targeting an IS oil storage facility, as well as a large oil truck depot, with a voiceover saying: “For the first time, the US is attacking oil delivery trucks.”

Konashenkov suggested that the coalition release “at least half the volume of the footage that we released in the course of three months of operation in Syria” instead of making accusations about Russian airstrikes being indiscriminate.

“The more precise our airstrikes against terrorists become, the louder Western media get in their accusations and citations of anonymous sources that claim that attacks by Russian warplanes are indiscriminate,” Konashenkov added.

“Today we are the only army in the world that has showed how we have hit terrorist targets with specified precision weapons from Russian planes and ships. At the same time, we know, at best, only a few words from [US] officials about the results of the [US-led] anti-ISIS coalition’s combat aviation operations.”

Russia launched its military operation in Syria on September 30, at the request of the Syrian government. Link

[Nordic]

Very compelling article from The Saker about Putin, Syria, Israel, and many other things. Very helpful to understanding the balance of power in many regards.

http://thesaker.is/putin-and-israel-a-c ... ationship/

Putin and Israel – a complex and multi-layered relationship

811 Views
December 23, 2015
3 Comments
Putin and Israel – a complex and multi-layered relationship
The recent murder of Samir Kuntar by Israel has, yet again, inflamed the discussion about Putin’s relation to Israel. This is an immensely complicated topic and those who like simple, canned, “explanations” should stop reading right now. The truth is, the relationship between Russia and Israel and, even before that, between Jews and Russians would deserve an entire book. In fact, Alexander Solzhenitsyn has written exactly such a book, it is entitled “200 years together”, but due to the iron grip of the Zionists on the Anglo media, it has still not been translated into English. That should already tell you something right there – an author acclaimed worldwide who got the Nobel Prize for literature cannot get his book translated into English because its contents might undermine the official narrative about Russian-Jewish relations in general and about the role Jews played in Russian 20th century politics in particular! What other proof of the reality of the subordination of the former British Empire to Zionists interest does one need?

I have already written about this topic in the past and, at the very least, I will ask you to read the following two background articles before continuing to read:

AngloZionist: Short primer for the newcomers
How a medieval concept of ethnicity makes NATO commit yet another a dangerous blunder
Before looking into some of the idiosyncrasies of the Russian-Israeli relationship I want to stress one very important thing: you should not simply assume that the relationship between Jews and non-Jews in Russia is similar to what it is in the West. This is not the case. Without going through a detailed discussion of the emancipation of Jews in the West and their long track from their rabbi-run shtetls to the boardrooms of the biggest western corporations, I will just say that for Russian Jews this process of emancipation happened in a much more violent and catastrophic way. The second big difference between western Jews and Russian Jews is that roughly between 1917 and 1939 a specific subset of Jews (Bolshevik Jews) were in quasi total control of Russia. During that period the Bolshevik Jews persecuted Russians and, especially, Orthodox Christians with a truly genocidal hate. This is a fact of history which most Russians are very much aware of, even if this is still considered crimethink in most western circles. It is also important to stress here that the Bolshevik Jews persecuted not only Orthodox Christians, but all religious groups, including, by the way, Judaics. Putin is very much aware of all these facts which he addressed when speaking to a group of Judaics in Moscow:



In the 2nd article mentioned above I discussed these issues and all I want to do know is to show you that Putin is very much aware of this past and that he has the courage and intellectual honesty to remind Russian Jews of it.

The other absolutely crucial fact about the relationship between Russia and Israel is the immigration of Russian Jews to Israel. Here I will just submit to you a bullet-point list of why this is a crucial factor:

Regardless of whether they ended up in Israel, Austria, Germany, the USA or Israel, the immigration of Russian Jews to Israel made it possible for those Jews who did not want to stay in Russia to leave. Conversely, those who did not leave stayed by choice. This means that the vast majority, if not all, of the rabid russophobes and Christianity-hating Jews have left Russia. Those who stayed in Russia did so because they decided that it was their home.
A large number (some estimates go as high has 20%) of so-called “Jews” who left Russia are not Jewish at all, including some of those who settled in Israel. The truth is that the economic and social hardships which faced the Soviet society under Brezhnev & Co and Russia under Eltsin made a lot of non-Jewish Russian invent themselves some (non-existing) Jewish origins just to emigrate. Thus there are many real Russians, as opposed to Russian Jews, in Israel.
As a result of this big immigration there are innumerable personal ties between individuals and families living in Israel and Russia. This means that when, say, Iraq or Hezbollah rain rockets in Israel there are folks in Russia who are personally concerned about their friends in Israel even if they don’t necessarily approve of Israeli politics.
The so-called “Russian Mafia” is, in reality, mostly a Mafia of Russian Jews. This is particularly true in the West. In Russia there are Jewish mobsters, but not really a Jewish mob as such. Russian and Jewish mobsters get along famously and that also creates, shall we say, strong “business” ties between “Russian” oligarchs and Israel.
Eltsin the country was de-facto ruled by what was called the semibankirshchina, the “rule of the Seven Bankers”. These were the seven top bankers of Russia who owned about 50% of the entire Russian economy. All of them except one (Potanin) were Jews.
During the Eltisin years, the vast majority of the members of government and, especially, their advisors were Jews. Jews also were in control of almost all of the mainstream media. To give you an idea of how prevalent this trend was in the 1990s, here is a (machine translated) list of top-level Jews in Eltsin’s Russia I have found on the Internet: (source: https://goo.gl/jZlazH)
The oligarchs are Jews in order to ensure the re-election of Boris Yeltsin in the next term in the 1996 presidential election:
1991 – 1999
Boris Yeltsin (Eltsin – Jew married to a Jew).
Naina Yeltsin – a Jew.
Adviser to the President on economic issues – Livshits – JEW.
During all the time of Yeltsin’s rule (1991-1999) the majority of his advisers were Jewish.
Head of Presidential Administration Filatov, Chubais, Voloshin, the daughter of the President (a new position of the Jewish authorities), Tatyana Dyachenko (by Jewish law – Halacha, as the daughter of a Jewish – a Jew) .- All the Jews.
GOVERNMENT
All key ministers – JEWS:
Economy Minister – Yasin – Jew
Zam. Minister of Economy – Urinson – Jew
The Minister of Finance – Panskov – Jew
Zam. Minister of Finance – Vavilov – Jew
Chairman of the Central Bank – Paramonov – Jew
Minister of Foreign Affairs – Kozyrev – Jew
Minister of Energy – Shafranik – Jew
Minister of Communications – Bulhak – Jew
Minister of Natural Resources – Danilov– Jew
Minister of Transport – Efimov – Jew
The Minister of Health – Nechayev – Jew
Minister for Science – Saltykov – Jew
Minister of Culture – Sidorov – Jew
mass media
Chairman of the Media – Rodents – Jew
PRESS
“News” – Golembiovskiy – Jew
“Komsomolskaya Pravda” – Fronin – Jew
“Moskovsky Komsomolets” – Gusev (Drabkin) – Jew
“Arguments and Facts” – Starks – Jew
“Work” – Potapov – Jew
“Moscow News” – Karpinski – Jew
“Kommersant” – Yakovlev (Ginsburg) – Jew
“New Look” – Dodolev – Jew
“Nezavisimaya Gazeta” – Tretyakov – Jew
“Evening Moscow” – Lisin – Jew
“Literary Newspaper” – Udaltsov – Jew
“Publicity” – Izyumov – Jew
“Interlocutor” – Kozlov – Jew
“Rural Life” – Kharlamov – a Jew.
“Top Secret” – Borovik – Jew.
Television and radio:
TV and Radio, “Ostankino” – A. Yakovlev – a Jew.
Russian TV and Radio Company – Poptsov – Jew.
1996-1999 GG - “Seven bankers”.
All Russian finance concentrated in the hands of the Jews.
A country ruled by seven bankers (“seven bankers”):
1.Aven – Jew
2. Berezovsky – a Jew,
3. Gusinsky – a Jew,
4. Potanin (Potanin on different data).
5. Smolensk – Jew
6. Friedman – a Jew,
7. Khodorkovsky – a Jew.
8 Roman Abramovich
The lists of Jews in the Soviet government from 1917-1939 look exactly similar. You can find them on the Internet yourselves.

In truth, folks who compile such lists are rarely motivated by purely scientific purposes and they often don’t feel constrained by strict rules of evidence. So it is quite possible that a certain percentage of “Jews” listed above are not Jews at all. But even with a wide margin of error – you get the picture. Just as between 1917 and 1939, between 1991 and 1999 the reigns of power in Russia were firmly in Jewish hands, and in both cases, with truly catastrophic consequences. The big difference is that if in the early 20th century the Jews in power were ideological opponents of the Anglo Empire, in the late 20th century the Jews in Russia were practically an extension of the AngloZionist Empire.

Speaking of extensions of the AngloZionist Empire.

I have already explained many times in the past that the candidature of Putin to succeed Eltsin was a compromise reached between the Russian security services and Russian “big money” who pushed Medvedev as a counter-weight to Putin. I usually refer to the forces backing Putin as “Eurasian Sovereignists” and the forces backing Medvedev as “Atlantic Integrationists”. The goal of the former is to fully sovereignize Russia and make her a key element in a multi-polar but unified Eurasian continent while the goal of the latter is to be accepted by the AngloZionist Empire as an equal partner and to integrate Russia into the western power structures. Next is something so important that I will single it out on a separate parapgraph:

The Atlantic Sovereignists are still in full control of the Russian financial and banking sector, of all the key economic ministries and government positions, they control the Russian Central Bank and they are, by far, the single biggest threat to the rule of Putin and those supporting him. Considering that roughly 90% of Russians now support Putin, that means that these Atlantic Sovereignists are the single biggest threat to the Russian people and Russia as a whole.
How is that all linked to Israel? Simple!

Putin inherited a system created by and for the AngloZionist Empire. He was a compromise candidate between two radically opposed parties and it took him years to first get rid of most of the the Russian (Jewish) oligarchs and then, very gradually, begin cleanup process in which slowly, step by step, the Zionists were booted out of their positions of power. According to Mikhail Khazin, the balance between these two groups has only recently reached a 50/50 point of (unstable) equilibrium. That also means that the “Putin people” need to watch their back every day the Good Lord makes because they know that their so-called “colleagues” are willing to stab them in a blink of an eye as soon as they get an opportunity.

I happen to think that the rumors of a coup in Russia are greatly exaggerated. Not only because Putin does the support of the “power ministries” (Defense, State Security, Internal Affairs, etc.) but, much more importantly, because of the 90% support he has with the Russian people. To overthrow a man with such a cult-like following, a man truly loved by the vast majority of people, would be too dangerous. But that does not mean that the 5th column is not willing to sabotage every effort of Putin and his supporters.

The truth is that Putin has been forced to compromise many, many times. Here are just a few examples:

The oligarchs: when Putin ridded Russia of the semibankirshchina he did not really crack down on all the oligarchs as such. He only only got rid of those oligarchs who, like Khodorkovsky, had tried to basically stage a coup against Putin by buying the entire Duma. The oligarchs were told “stay out of politics and I will leave you alone”. The deal is still on today.

The economy: even in his last speech Putin had to declare that he fully supports the Central Bank and the economic Ministers of the Medvedev government. Considering that literally ALL Putin allies openly and vocally are screaming bloody murder about the way the Russian economy is mismanaged, this is clearly a coerced statement and not something he believes in. By the way, I am observing a systematic vilification campaign on the central Russian TV channels against the Central Bank and the economic Ministers and this cannot be a coincidence. I predict that Putin is preparing a purge of these circles, but that he needs to line up all his ducks in a row before taking action, especially by inflaming the public opinion against them. Right now the Russian economy is still run by IMF-stooges, by “Washington consensus” types, hence their crazy policy on interest rates, on buying US obligations, on keeping inflation low, etc. etc. etc. Putin, by conviction, is not what I would call a “socialist” but he is most definitely a proponent of “social markets” and somebody who is trying hard to decouple Russia from the western financial system, and not play by the rules of the Empire.

Foreign policy: right up until Putin’s latest re-election when finally Russia began to have a fairly consistent foreign policy, the policy of Russia has been one of zigs followed by zags. This was especially true during the times when Medvedev was in charge of the Presidency and when Iran and Libya were betrayed by Russia at the UNSC (something Putin openly called “stupid”).

Personalities: remember the hyper-corrupt Minister of Defense Serdiukov? Guess what? He has still not been formally charged with anything. Even the woman he did most of his dirty dealing with still lives in her luxurious apparent in Moscow. What does this tell us? That even when Putin got the hard proof of Serdiukov’s malfeasance he had enough power to replace him by Shoigu, but not enough to power to stick such high-profile “Atlantic Sovereignists” into jail.

Nazi occupied Ukraine: Putin had enough control over the government to provide the vital Voentorg and to even send some special forces and artillery strikes across the border to help the Novorussians, but he could not force the economic Ministries to use the Russian economic might to strangle the Ukrainian economy. This resulted in Russia sending artillery shells across the border in Saur Mogila and (basically free) energy across the border to Kiev.

Russophobic propaganda: when recently some third-rate sport journalist, Alexei Andronov, posted a viciously anti-Russian comment in Twitter he was criticized for that by Alexei Pushkov, a journalist who is also the head of the foreign-affairs committee in the State Duma on his own TV show “Postscriptum”. The TV channel which airs the show, TV Tsentr, the censored the segment criticizing Andronov. Then, the famous Russian movie director Nikita Mikhailkov recoded an entire show discussing this event, the TV channel running his show, TV Rossia, also censored the entire episode. As for the director of the TV channel where Andronov works, Tina Kandelaki, she gave Andronov her full support. Bottom line: while Putin did immensely improve the overall quality of the Russian media, the russophobes are still very influential and can spew their hateful venom in total impunity.

I could continue to list example after example, but I think you get the idea: Putin is a very good man in charge of a very bad system.

Now let’s really get back to Syria, Hezbollah and the murder of Samir Kuntar.

First, consider that the decision to militarily intervene in the Syrian war was already a controversial one. Putin pulled this one off by doing two things: explaining to the Russian people that it was better to deal with the terrorists “there” (in Syria) rather than “here” (in Russia) and by promising that he would not send in ground forces. When Daesh and the Turks fulfilled the promise made by Obama and Biden and blew a Russian airliner and, later, a SU-24 bomber out of the sky, the Russian public continued to support Putin, but most Russians, including myself, were acutely aware of the dangers of the situation. At the end of the day, it is Putin’s personal “street cred” which allowed him to stay the course in spite of real fears.

Second, it is clear that Putin and Netanyahu struck a deal when the latter traveled to Moscow: the Israelis don’t interfere in Russian operations in support of the Syrians as long as the Russians don’t interfere in the combat operations between Israel and Hezbollah. This made it possible for both sides to pursue their main interest even if it was at the cost of their secondary objectives. You don’t like that deal and you question its morality? Good! So do I. I am, in fact, intensely uncomfortable with it, but I expect no less from ruthless realpolitik practitioners like Putin and Bibi Netanyahu (good thing you and I are not in power!).

There is, by the way, another precedent which I am just as uncomfortable with: the Russian total backing for the Egyptian military’s bloody repression against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. I accept the argument that to support the Egyptian military made sense in the context of the war in Syria, but the ethnics of supporting such a regime intensely bother me. This is why Putin is a ruthless but successful politician and I am a little quasi-irrelevant blogger: it takes a ruthless bear to fight ruthless wolves.

This being said, let’s not pretend like Hezbollah is any less cynical when needed. I remind you all that when Imad Mugniyeh was murdered in Damascus by the very same Israelis in an operation which could only have been executed with very high level accomplices in the Assad regime, Hezbollah promised “retaliation” but never peeped a single word against the regime. Neither did Hezbollah have any objections when Assad was torturing Muslims on behalf of the US CIA for the infamous “rendition” program.

As for Putin, he simply has other priorities than to protect Hezbollah or fight Israel:

Surviving inside Russia and not being overthrown by the still very powerful Zionist Power Configuration (to use James Petras’ expression) in Russia being a top one. Another priority would be not to give his (internal and external) enemies the political argument that “Russia is attacking Israel”. Not having a shooting match with Israel and not to have the small and isolated Russian contingent have to fight on two fronts would be crucial too. Ditto not to be accused of having the Russians contingent turned into the de-facto “Hezbollah Air Force” like the US is the “Daesh Air Force”. These are all obvious priorities for Putin.

And then this: while the Russian S-400s can easily shoot down any Israeli aircraft, the Russian AirSpace contingent does not have the materials means to fight Israel or, even less so, NATO and CENTCOM. As for Russia, she most definitely cannot pick a fight with Israel not due to the inherent power of this tiny Zionist Entity, but due to the fact that the US Empire has been thoroughly taken under Zionist control. So those Americans who now complain that Putin “does not have the courage” to take on Israel should first ask themselves how it is that Israel seems to have transformed the USA and Europe in a voiceless Zionist protectorate and what they are doing to liberate themselves from that yoke!

Speaking of the West: one ought to compare the position of the AngloZionist Empire one one hand, and of many influential Russian Jews (in Russia and in Israel) about the war in the Ukraine. While the West has been in total support of the Nazi regime in Kiev, many Russian Jews, especially the very famous ones like Vladimir Soloviev, have taken a categorically anti-Nazi position. And while in Israel the popularity of Putin and Russia is still extremely low, most of the anti-Putin opposition in Russia is not formed of Jews. Finally, the Russian general public is, sadly, extremely poorly informed of the horrors perpetrated by the Zionist regime against the Palestinian people while Israelis and dual-nationals (like Evgenii Satanovskii or Avigdor Eskin) are constantly peddling the notion that “we Russians and Israelis are the only ones standing up to Muslim terrorism” thereby capitalizing to the max by the current war between Russia and Daesh. In other words, Putin would have one hell of a tough time selling the shooting down of an Israeli aircraft to the Russian general public.

I understand that none of the above will have any traction with bona fide Jew-haters or with those who like simple, black and white, arguments. For them Putin will forever remain a sellout, an eternal shabbos-goy or a puppet of the international financiers. Frankly, I am not addressing this to them. But there are those who are sincerely bewildered and confused about Russian policies which do appear to be confusing or even contradictory. To them I will conclude by saying this:

Putin advances his cause one step a a time and he knows how to wait and let events take on their own dynamic. He is also acutely aware that he is literally fighting with one hand tied behind his back and the other one busy defending against external and internal enemies (the latter being far more dangerous) at the same time. I am sure that Putin fully realizes that,at least potentially, his policy of resistance, sovereignization and liberation can lead to an intercontinental nuclear war and that Russia is currently still weaker than the AngloZionist Empire. Just as in the times of Stolypin, Russia desperately needs a few more years of peace to develop herself and fully stand up. This is most definitely not the time for a frontal confrontation with the Empire. Russia vitally needs *peace* and *time*: peace in the Ukraine, peace in Europe and, yes, peace in the Middle-East. Alas, the latter is not an option and, when cornered, Putin did take the decision to go to war. And I am absolutely and categorically certain that if the Empire attacks Russia (from Turkey or elsewhere), Russia will fight back. Russia is willing to go to war if needed, but she will do her utmost to avoid it. This is the price Russia pays for being the weaker side. The good news is that Russia is getting stronger with every passing day, while the Empire is getting weaker. And the power of the AngloZionists and their 5th column in Russia is also weakening with every passing day. But this process will take time.

The big event to watch for is a crackdown on the Central Bank and the economy ministries of the government. Everybody in Russia is waiting for this, Putin even got directly asked this question recently, but he is sill denying it all and saying that he fully supports these saboteurs. Considering Putin’s track, it is plain stupid to say that he really supports them – this is clearly a delaying tactic until the time is right.

Make no mistake. There is no big love between Russia and Israel. But neither is there a lot of hostility, at least not on the Russian side. Most Russian are aware of the ugly role Jews played already twice in Russian history, but this does not translate into the kind of hostility towards Jews which you would see, for example, in the Ukraine. At most Russians can be suspicious of Jewish *power* but rarely does this translate into hostility for Jews as regular people. Some of the most adored Russian public figures, like the bard Vladimir Vysotskii, had Jewish blood. Most Russians also make a distinction between “their” Jews (russophobic Jews in the West) and “our” Jews (Russian Jews who love Russia). But since russophobia has also been widespread amongst Russian elites, before and after the Revolution, it can hardly be described as a Jewish phenomenon. The Russian culture having always been multi-national and multi-ethnic does not really separate people by their ethnicity but judges them much more readily by their actions and ideas. For all these reasons, the hatred of the “Yid” is much more a Ukrainian nationalist phenomenon than a Russian one.

And while most Russians would not want to have a return to power of a new version of the Bolshevik commissars or the “democratic” oligarchs inside Russia, there is a closeness and an anti-Nazi solidarity between Russians and Israelis which should not be dismissed.

Concerning Palestine, Russia will support all the relevant UN Resolutions and thus be the typical and rather unimaginative “two state solution” proponent. At most, Russia will “deplore” or “regret” the abuses of Palestinians by Israelis, but Russia will never become a systematic defender of Palestinian rights like Iran or Hezbollah simply because the future of Palestine is not a Russian priority.

I hope that the above is helpful in understanding why Russia does not take any action to protect Hezbollah against the Israelis (and why she will not prevent Hezbollah from retaliating from Syria, should Hezbollah take that decision). Simply put: there is no compelling internal or external reason for Russia to get directly involved in this while there are plenty of compelling internal and external reasons for Russia to stay out. If in the past the USSR supported the PLO on both ideological and geostrategic reasons, modern Russia today will not follow the same paradigm. Besides, it’s not like Fatah or Hamas are attractive, or even credible, partners for Russia, being in bed as they are with Daesh. Ditto for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

As for Hezbollah, it is not like they need Russia’s protection. Symbolic as they may be, the murders of Imad Mugniyeh or Samir Kuntar will in no way weaken the Resistance. In fact, if the history of the murder of Abbas al-Musawi teaches us anything, it is that sometimes Israelis murder a Hezbollah leader only to find out that the next one is even a more formidable adversary. God willing, this will also be the case this time.

The Saker

TAGGED
HezbollahIsraelRussiaRussian-Israeli relationshipSamir Kuntar

[parel]

Wow. Many thanks for the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff for working around Embalmer!

According to Seymour M. Hersh · Military to Military: US intelligence sharing in the Syrian war · LRB 7 January 2016:

Barack Obama’s repeated insistence that Bashar al-Assad must leave office – and that there are ‘moderate’ rebel groups in Syria capable of defeating him – has in recent years provoked quiet dissent, and even overt opposition, among some of the most senior officers on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff. Their criticism has focused on what they see as the administration’s fixation on Assad’s primary ally, Vladimir Putin. In their view, Obama is captive to Cold War thinking about Russia and China, and hasn’t adjusted his stance on Syria to the fact both countries share Washington’s anxiety about the spread of terrorism in and beyond Syria; like Washington, they believe that Islamic State must be stopped... No ifs or buts

It has been argued that criticism of veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh's new piece in the London Review of Books fails to understand what really happened in the tussle on a very fundamental and very significant point of difference for 'strategic outcomes' on Syria between the White House (and the CIA) and the U.S. military chiefs including defense intelligence: http://www.moonofalabama.org/.../how-a- ... f-hershs...

Seymour Hersh's insights is an interesting backdrop to recent about turn in events on Syria that culminated in the rare show of UN agreement in the UN Security Council Resolution #UNSCR2254 on the Syrian roadmap being unanimously adopted.

Here's an outline of a few of those events:
1) First, the very unambiguous statements from John Kerry in Moscow. Especially these ones (source: http://m.state.gov/md250680.htm ):
“As I emphasized today, the United States and our partners are not seeking so-called “regime change,” as it is known in Syria”
“Now, we don’t seek to isolate Russia as a matter of policy, no”
... Together they constitute an official, 180 degree turn, an abandonment of official US goals towards both Russia and Syria.

2) Second, those U.S. words were followed by actions:
- The U.S. is withdrawing a dozen warplanes from a Turkish air base, barely a month after they arrived to help Turkey protect its air space and to conduct strikes against Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq. http://www.seattletimes.com/.../us-withdrawing-12.../ This at a time when NATO chief promised more air defense help for Turkey. Also interesting to note this recent development in Turkey "news": “Erdogan’s Spin Machine Now Blames [Russian] Su-24 Shoot-Down on Turkish Air Force Chief”. Read the full article originally from the German Economic News and translated here, http://russia-insider.com/.../erdogan-blames.../ri11874 it appears that there is a campaign launched in the Turkish social media to blame the downing of the Russian SU-24 on the Turkish Air Force Chief (nevermind that Erdogan publicly declared that he personally gave that order).

- Finally, Russia succeeded in getting a unanimous decision of the UNSC to adopt a Russian resolution targeting Daesh finances. https://www.rt.com/news/326356-un-secur ... -finances/ Needless to say, if the United Nations Security Council Resolution was officially aimed at Daesh money sources, it really puts U.S. key allies in the Syrian conflict - Qatar, Saudi Arabia and, especially, Turkey in a very difficult situation: not only does the UNSC Resolution foresee sanctions against any country or entity dealing with Daesh, but the investigation of any claims of such financial relationships will be conducted by the UN., giving that push for transparency and accountability international legitimacy.

What is certain is that the plan to provoke Moscow into military confrontation failed. The Russians did not take the bait and did not retaliate militarily after the downing of its civilian and Air Force planes and that now the political consequences of this disaster are starting to pile up in the turn around, in the mobilisation of global support around Russian initiatives for political solutions

But make no mistake, all signs are, parallel to this not so common political mobilisation around Russian leadership, given the double speaks of recent and ages past is stepping up its military capacity in Syria and Putin publicly declaring Russia is more than ready to use more force if necessary. Hence the Russians doubled their efforts in Syria, even considering opening a new second defense airport, digging in and more ready for war than ever before.

That unprecedented level of preparedness in Syria with the full support of international law (Russia is the only state formally being asked by the sovereign Syrian state to intervene) of the world's only other nuclear power that is able and now willing to hold U.S to account, is the "trip-wire" for an all out war the U.S. is not prepared to cross ... for now
For full coverage of these views and more, go to http://www.unz.com/.../week-eleven-of-the-russian.../

Let's hope and pray goodwill and peace prevail, and the amazing peace dividends demonstrated in the gathering at the last global gathering for #humansecurity - for the #COP21Paris Agreement, will help remind world leaders and the international community that wars and warmongering have no place in building sustainably resilient planetary futures.

[seemslikeadream]

This Year’s Hottest Toy: Iraq-Syria LEGO Playset
Peter Van Buren, December 22, 2015

Every Christmas sees one toy emerge as the most-wanted, gotta have gift – remember Tickle Me Elmo, and Beanie Babies from years past? Well, 2015’s big hit has emerged: The Iraq-Syria LEGO Playset.

The set retails for three trillion dollars, though the price may have doubled by the time this is published. Included in the standard set are enough LEGOS to build replicas of Mosul and Fallujah, allowing a child to refight those battles over and over. Figures include Sunni militias, Islamic State fighters, Shia militias, one figure representing the actual Iraqi Army, American special forces with and without boots, Iranians, Kurds, Turks, Russians, Syrians (moderate and radical, though they cannot be told apart), British, French and Italian troops, shady Saudi financiers and Hezbollah soldiers.


The basic set also includes a starter pack of refugee figures, though most people will want to opt for the bonus pack, if only to get access to the limited edition dead children refugee figures.

Not included: any weapons of mass destruction.

While the Iraq-Syria LEGO Playset will provide any child with decades of fun, even more adventures can be played out by buying the Turkish Expansion Pack.

And parents, please note: Even after careful construction with the best of intention, the playset tends to simply fall apart.

[seemslikeadream]

RI threads


Bush declares national emergency/ Lebanon, Syria 8/1/07

Syria 'fires on Israel warplanes'

US confirms Israeli air strike on Syria

"Syria on Nuclear Watch List"=post-nuke-oops GOAL

Isreali raid vs. Syria was about nukes...maybe


Interesting rumor on assassin in Syria

Syria: refuge or trap for Iraqi refugees?

U.S. Plan for Nuking Iran, Syria, Libya


US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?


Wikileaks – Syria Files

'US believes Syria moving part of chemical stockpile'


US Proxy Al Qaeda Death Squads in Syria

Hiroshima To Syria The Enemy Whose Name We Dare Not Speak

Crimean Crisis and Middle East Will Syria & Iran be Winners

4 Reasons Syria Refugees Are Bigger Story Than MalaysianAir

Neocons’ Ukraine-Syria-Iran Gambit

The Complete Destruction of Syria

Regime Change in Iraq Syria Lebanon Libya Somalia Sudan Iran

Russian military buildup in Syria...

[seemslikeadream]

World | Sat Feb 6, 2016 9:27am EST Related: WORLD, TURKEY, GREECE, MIGRANT CRISIS
Turkey must cut migrant flows to Europe, top EU official says
AMSTERDAM | BY ROBIN EMMOTT
A young migrant pulls a trolley in a muddy field at a camp of makeshift shelters for migrants and asylum-seekers from Iraq, Kurdistan, Iran and Syria, called the Grande Synthe jungle, near Calais, France, February 3, 2016. REUTERS/Yves Herman
A young migrant pulls a trolley in a muddy field at a camp of makeshift shelters for migrants and asylum-seekers from Iraq, Kurdistan, Iran and Syria, called the Grande Synthe jungle, near Calais, France, February 3, 2016.
REUTERS/YVES HERMAN
Europe needs Turkey to dramatically cut the number of migrants reaching Greece within weeks or the pressure for more border closures and fences will grow, the EU's top official in charge of ties with Ankara warned on Saturday.

Frustrated that refugees continue to stream into Greece despite a Nov. 29 deal between Ankara and Brussels to slow down the flows, European Commissioner Johannes Hahn said Turkey must show results by the time EU leaders meet for a Feb. 18-19 summit.

"This action plan was agreed more than two months ago and we are still not seeing a significant decline in the number of migrants," Hahn, the EU's enlargement commissioner, told Reuters after an EU foreign ministers' meeting in Amsterdam attended by Turkey's foreign minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu.

"Turkey could do more, I have no doubt," Hahn said, adding that Ankara's need to shift forces to curb violence in southeastern Turkey was "no excuse" for not patrolling its western coast and cooperating with Greece.

The European Commission, the EU executive, is set to publish on Wednesday a report on Turkey's progress in implementing the migrant deal. While Turkish police targeting people smugglers have made arrests and Turkey has introduced a limited work-permit scheme for Syrian refugees, the Commission report is likely to be critical.

"We need results before the EU summit to show leaders that this is working," Hahn said. "I am concerned there's not enough time."

More than one million people arrived in Europe last year, fleeing war and failing states in the Middle East and North Africa. Numbers show little sign of falling, despite the winter.

Asked to detail the cost of a failed deal with Turkey, Hahn said: "It increases the pressure to find other solutions," referring to border fences that go against EU rules on the freedom of its citizens to move across frontiers to live and work.

Hahn's warning of the consequences of inaction was highlighted by a call from Hungary and Austria at the Amsterdam meeting for fences on the Macedonian and Bulgarian borders with Greece and between Austria and Slovenia to stop migrants.

Hahn said if such fences were built it would only create a "domino effect" with many EU nations closing their frontiers and putting at risk the bloc's passport-free Schengen zone.

Six Schengen members, including Germany and four other EU countries, have resorted to reinstating temporary border checks in the passport-free area. They can stay in place until May.

The EU has agreed to give Turkey 3 billion euros ($3.2 billion) to keep Syrian refugees on its soil in return for an acceleration of the EU accession talks and speeded-up visa liberalization for Turks visiting Europe.

The deal is contentious because while EU countries now recognize they need strategically important Turkey, they are concerned about what they see as President Tayyip Erdogan's growing authoritarianism.

[seemslikeadream]

Videos Made by Civilians Fleeing Aleppo Show Scenes of Devastation
By LIAM STACKFEB. 6, 2016

Tens of thousands of civilians have fled the city of Aleppo and its environs in recent days as the Syrian military, backed by the punishing air power of Russian jets, made an aggressive push into a region of the country that long ago fell from government control.

Many of the fleeing civilians had remained in their homes for years despite the war raging all around them. Their flight alarmed aid groups and scuttled peace talks held in Geneva, and it filled social media with homemade video and personal accounts of their harried trek.

Many of the videos posted online in recent days showed the devastation in and around Aleppo that drove so many people to leave. Each clip provides a glimpse into life in wartime, but because of the nature of social media posts in conflict zones, there are things about them that sometimes cannot be determined, including the identities of individuals who made videos and whether or not they are still alive.



Syrian Forces Press Aleppo, Sending Thousands FleeingFEB. 5, 2016
One video posted to YouTube by members of Al Buraq Media Institution, an activist media group, showed what it said were the first moments after a Russian airstrike in the Aleppo neighborhood of Mashhad. The scene is chaotic: Emergency sirens wail, the street is strewn with chunks of rubble, a thick cloud of dust hangs in the air and high-pitched voices can be heard shrieking. It is not clear how many people were killed or injured in the strike.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtUy5yPIk7s

البراق || اللحظات الأولى للقصف الجوي الروسي الذي استهدف حي "المشهد" يوم الخميس 2016/2/4 Video by مؤسسة البراق الإعلامية
Another antigovernment media group, the Shahba Press Agency, shared several videos from the battered towns north of the city on social media.

In one video, two unidentified men in Marea, a town 15 miles north of Aleppo, are shown standing amid the ruins of a building, where twisted metal rods sprout like weeds from shattered blocks of pale concrete.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYUociSSa5g
دمار واسع خلفه قصف الطيران الروسي لمدينة مارع بريف حلب الشمالي Video by وكالة شهبا برس Shahba Press Agency
“This is what the Russian jets have wrought, and the jets of the regime,” one of the men said. The ruined buildings had once housed civilians, he said, but the government “beats us as if we are all terrorists here, as if we are all ISIS.”

A second video the group shared shows a sobbing child, covered in dust, being rescued from the rubble of a recently bombed building. The blast dropped a piece of concrete larger than the boy’s body on his head, pinning him to the ground. It is not clear if he survived.

Those clips set the stage for another video posted online by the Shahba Press Agency that showed thousands of people waiting at a closed Turkish border crossing. A child, who did not provide his name, explained why they fled.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go_J8dCEC8w
الآلاف من ريف حلب الشمالي عالقون على الحدود السورية التركية بسبب القصف الروسي Video by وكالة شهبا برس Shahba Press Agency
“Because of the strikes of Russia and Iran and Bashar,” the boy said, in reference to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

He also said the refugees were fleeing “the Party of Dogs and the Party of Satan,” in reference to the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, whose name in Arabic means “Party of God.”

The boy said that coalition of forces “attacked our homes” and, in reference to the government forces, that “the Shiite army” had advanced on their towns.

Similar scenes appeared again and again in social media videos posted from the Turkish border region in recent days.

A man who identified himself on YouTube and Facebook as Mohammad Nour Mhiemaed posted two videos that showed large numbers of people traveling toward Turkey.

The first video, posted on Thursday, shows a line of honking cars clogging a road that Mr. Mhiemaed described as leading toward the Turkish border crossing at Bab al-Salameh.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qU58F7wv-c
المدنين النازحين داخل معبر باب السلامة متوجهين للمعبر التركي 2016/2/4 Video by Mohammad Nour Mhiemaed
A second video showed a steady stream of refugees, including a large number of women and children, inside what the cameraman described as the Syrian side of the crossing. He said the border had not been opened and he blamed the United States, a rumor whose popularity cannot be determined from the clip.

Mr. Mhiemaed then made a claim that felt more like a statement of fact: “All these refugees are going to need the Turks.”

[seemslikeadream]

Syria's Enemies Seek Face Saving Escalation Measures

By Moon Of Alabama

February 05, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Moon Of Alabama" -

Russia Accuses Turkey of Preparing to Invade Syria

The Russian military said Thursday that it has "reasonable grounds" to suspect that Turkey is making intensive preparations for a military invasion of neighboring Syria.
Images of a checkpoint on the border between the Turkish town of Reyhanli and the town of Sarmada in Syrian taken in late October and late January show a buildup of transportation infrastructure that could be used for moving in troops, ammunition and weapons, spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said in an English-language written statement.

He said these were among growing signs of "hidden preparation of the Turkish armed forces for active actions on the territory of Syria.
...
A Turkish Foreign Ministry official said the ministry would have no immediate comment.

The Russian high command press briefing (vid with English subtitles) includes the pictures of the border post.

Turkey yesterday prohibited a Russian reconnaissance "Open Skies Treaty" flight over the Turkish-Syrian border zone. There are dozens such flights per year over Russia by NATO and over NATO countries by Russia. This is to my knowledge the first time such a flight, which had earlier been requested and accepted, is blocked by the guest country.

The Russian military spokesperson snarked:

It is to be reminded that the Russian Defence Ministry has intensified all kinds of intelligence in the Middle East region.
That’s why, if someone in Ankara thinks that the prohibition of Russian observer flight allows to hide something, it is unprofessional.

The decisive Syrian government victory yesterday cuts off the foreign supported insurgents in Aleppo and Idleb from they supply sources in Turkey and deprives them of their fuel supplies.

In reaction to that victory the supporters of the insurgents and terrorist in Syria are likely to increase their efforts. The negotiations in Geneva failed over the Syrian victory and the Saudis had already promised that such a failure would lead to an increased support. The Saudi Defense Ministry declared today that Saudi ground forces could take part in action in Syria. It is doubtful that the Saudis have a real capability to do so.

But the Saudis and others will now again shower the insurgents and Jihadis in Syria with money and new weapons. A Turkish invasion could add momentum to such a move.

Such an invasion would be come at the Syrian and Turkish border between Azaz and Jarabulus that is currently under Islamic State control. The Syrian YPG Kurds plan to take that area with Russian help and to seal the border. Turkey does not want that to happen. Its well working lines of communication with the Islamic State must be kept open.

So is a Turkish invasion of Syria in preparation? My guess is yes.

But will it really happen? My guess is no.

NATO will restrain Turkey from such a misguided adventure. It could mean war with Russia and no European NATO country would like that to happen. Without NATO backing the Turkish military is unlikely to follow the order for such a move.

The Russia revelation of the Turkish preparations is increasing the deterrence against such a move. It also means that Russia would react harshly against a Turkish invasion and surely Russia has demonstrated by now that it has the means to do so in decisive ways.

But even while Turkey is unlikely to send its army it may use a proxy force to capture more Syrian territory.

The Zionist lobby in Washington DC in form of the Washington Institute is advising Turkey to invade Syria by proxy to keep the Kurds away from the border zone.

The most effective way to monitor the Azaz-Jarabulus border area would be to ensure that the Syrian side is filled by forces friendly to Turkey, or at least opposed to IS. One possible such group would be the Syrian Turkmens, who are ethnically related to Turks and are being trained by Turkey as a fighting force in northwestern Syria.
...
[T]he Turkish armed forces has modern artillery with an effective range of twenty to twenty-five miles, UAVs, and other means to protect its clients administering a prospective safe zone.
These "Turkmen" had occupied northern Latakia where they are just being kicked out by the Syrian army and its supporters. They consist of Turkish "Grey Wolf" fascists, Turkish Islamists and Chechen and Uhigur Islamist mercenaries. They are controlled by the Turkish secret service MIT.

The whole plan has a logical flaw. If, as the Washington Institute lobbyists claim, it is desirable for Turkey to monitor or seal the border from Islamic State infiltration why can't this be done on the Turkish side of the border? Why does this necessitate an illegal invasion by proxy of Syria? I find no plausible answer to that last question.

The lobbyists also skip over the question of potential retaliation. If Turkish artillery fires into Syria then Syria and its supporters are legally justified to fire back by whatever means are needed. A few Russian cruise missiles could easily take care of those Turkish artillery battalions. What would then follow?

Neither the Turks nor the Saudis nor the U.S. nor Israel have given up on their "regime change" war on Syria. But their proxies have taken serious losses and are likely to lose the fight. While we can expect some new attempts for escalation I expect that these will be mere face saving moves. It will take some additional time until the reality will sink in and until some other issue can be found to distract from their inevitable retreat.

Why The ‘Sultan of Chaos’ Is Freaking Out

By Pepe Escobar

February 05, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "RT" - Picture sleepless nights at ‘Sultan’ Erdogan’s palace in Ankara. Imagine him livid when he learns the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), backed by Russian air power, started a preemptive Battle of Aleppo – through the Bayirbucak region - cutting off Ankara’s top weaponizing corridor and Jihadi highway.

Who controls this corridor will control the final outcome of the war in Syria.
Meanwhile, in Geneva, the remote-controlled Syrian opposition, a.k.a. High Negotiations Committee, graphically demonstrated they never wanted to meet with the Damascus delegation in the first place – “proximity” talks or otherwise, even after Washington and Moscow roughly agreed on a two-year transition plan leading to a theoretically secular, nonsectarian Syria.

The Saudi front wanted no less than Ahrar al-Sham, Jaysh al-Islam and all Jabhat al-Nusra, a.k.a. al-Qaeda in Syria, collaborators at the table in Geneva. So the Geneva charade, quicker than one can say “Road to Aleppo!” was exposed for what it is.

And forget about NATO

Notorious Saudi intel mastermind Prince Turki, a former mentor of one Osama bin Laden, has been to Paris on a PR offensive; all he could muster was an avalanche of non-denial denials - and blaming the whole Syria tragedy on Bashar al-Assad.

The bulk of the Syrian ‘opposition’ used to be armchair warriors co-opted by the CIA for years, as well as CIA Muslim Brotherhood patsies/vassals. Many of these characters preferred the joys of Paris to a hard slog on Syrian ground. Now the ‘opposition’ is basically warlords answering to the House of Saud even for bottles of water – regardless of the suit-and-tie former Ba’ath Party ministers handpicked to be the face of the opposition for the gullible Western corporate media.

Meanwhile, the ‘4+1’ – Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, plus Hezbollah – is now winning decisive facts on the ground. The break down; there won’t be regime change in Damascus. Yet no one broke the news to the Turks and Saudis.

‘Sultan’ Erdogan is wallowing in a sea of desperation. He continues to divert the gravely serious issues at stake to his own war against the PYD - the umbrella organization of the Syrian Kurds - and the YPG (People's Protection Units, their military wing). Erdogan and Prime Minister Davutoglu wanted the PYD not only banned from Geneva but they want it smashed on the ground, as they see the PYD/YPG as “terrorists” allied to the PKK.

Yet what is ‘Sultan’ Erdogan going to do? Defy the recently arrived 4G++ Sukhoi Su-35S fighters – which are scaring the hell out of every NATO Dr. Strangelove? The Turkish Air Force putting its bases on “orange alert” may scare the odd vagrant dog at best. The same applies to NATO Secretary-General, figurehead Jens Stoltenberg, pleading to Russia “to act responsibly and fully respect NATO airspace.”

Moscow is going after the Turkmen with a vengeance and at the same time providing air support to the PYD west of the Euphrates. That hits the ‘Sultan’ in his heart of hearts; after all Erdogan has threatened multiple times that a PYD/YPG advance west of the Euphrates is the ultimate red line.

An already scared NATO won’t support the folly of an Erdogan war against Russia – as much as US and UK neocons may crave it; as NATO decisions must be unanimous, the last thing EU powers Germany and France want is yet another Southwest Asia war. NATO may deploy the odd Patriot missiles in southern Anatolia and the odd AWACs to support the Turkish Air Force. But that’s it.

Pick your favorite regime change

ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, meanwhile, continues to profit from its own Jihadi highway across a 98 kilometer stretch of Turkish/Syrian border, especially in Jarablus and Al Rai across from Gaziantep and Kilis in Turkey.

Taking a cue from Israel, Ankara is building a wall – 3.6 meters high, 2.5 meters wide - covering the stretch between Elbeyli and Kilis, essentially for propaganda purposes. Because the Jihadi Highway, for all practical purposes, remains open – even as Turkish Armed Forces may apprehend the odd trespasser (always released). We're talking about a monster smuggler/soldier scam; as much as $300 change hands for each night crossing and a noncommissioned Turkish officer may earn as much as $2,500 to look the other way for a few minutes.

The real question is why Gaziantep is not under a curfew imposed from Ankara, with thousands of Turkish Special Forces actually fighting a “war on terra” on the spot. That’s because Ankara and provincial authorities couldn’t give a damn; the real priority is Erdogan’s war on the Kurds.

This brings us to the only leverage the ‘Sultan’ may enjoy at the moment. From Brussels to Berlin, sound minds are terrified that the EU is now actually hostage to Erdogan’s Kurd “priority”, while Ankara is doing next to nothing to fight massive migrant smuggling.

When Davutoglu went to Berlin recently not only did he make no promises; he re-stressed Erdogan’s vow to "annihilate" the Syrian Kurds.

And that explains German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s own desperation. How could the alleged most powerful politician in Europe falls for such a crude extortion racket? The ‘Sultan’ wants a lot of cash, a lot of concessions, and even a further shot at entering the EU. Otherwise, he won’t turn off the tap on the grim refugee flood.

No wonder the regime change rumor mill is frantic. In Ankara? No; in Berlin.

[seemslikeadream]

Risking World War III in Syria
February 6, 2016

Exclusive: After Saudi-backed Syrian rebels balked at peace talks and the Russian-backed Syrian army cut off Turkish supply lines to jihadists and other Syrian rebels, the U.S. and its Mideast Sunni “allies” appear poised to invade Syria and force “regime change” even at the risk of fighting Russia, a gamble with nuclear war, writes Joe Lauria.


By Joe Lauria

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter last October said in a little noticed comment that the United States was ready to take “direct action on the ground” in Syria. Vice President Joe Biden said in Istanbul last month that if peace talks in Geneva failed, the United States was prepared for a “military solution” in that country.

The peace talks collapsed on Wednesday even before they began. A day later Saudi Arabia said it is ready to invade Syria while Turkey is building up forces at its Syrian border.

Saudi King Salman meets with President Barack Obama at Erga Palace during a state visit to Saudi Arabia on Jan. 27, 2015. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The U.N. aims to restart the talks on Feb. 25 but there is little hope they can begin in earnest as the Saudi-run opposition has set numerous conditions. The most important is that Russia stop its military operation in support of the Syrian government, which has been making serious gains on the ground.

A day after the talks collapsed, it was revealed that Turkey has begun preparations for an invasion of Syria, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. On Thursday, ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said: “We have good reasons to believe that Turkey is actively preparing for a military invasion of a sovereign state – the Syrian Arab Republic. We’re detecting more and more signs of Turkish armed forces being engaged in covert preparations for direct military actions in Syria.” The U.N. and the State Department had no comment. But this intelligence was supported by a sound of alarm from Turkey’s main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP).

Turkey, which has restarted its war against Kurdish PKK guerillas inside Turkey, is determined to crush the emergence of an independent Kurdish state inside Syria as well. Turkish strongman Recep Tayyip Erdogan stopped the Syrian Kurds from attending the aborted Geneva talks.

A Turkish invasion would appear poised to attack the Syrian Kurdish PYD party, which is allied with the PKK. The Syrian (and Iraqi) Kurds, with the Syrian army, are the main ground forces fighting the Islamic State. Turkey is pretending to fight ISIS, all the while actually supporting its quest to overthrow Assad, also a Turkish goal.

Saudi Arabia then said on Thursday it was prepared to send its ground forces into Syria if asked. Carter welcomed it. Of course Biden, Erdogan, Carter and the Saudis are all saying a ground invasion would fight ISIS. But their war against ISIS has been half-hearted at best and they share ISIS’ same enemy: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. If the U.S. were serious about fighting ISIS it would have at least considered a proposal by Russia to join a coalition as the U.S. did against the Nazis.

The Prize of Aleppo

The excuse of the Geneva collapse is a ruse. There was little optimism the talks would succeed. The real reason for the coming showdown in Syria is the success of Russia’s military intervention in defense of the Syrian government against the Islamic State and other extremist groups. Many of these groups are supported by Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United States in pursuit of overthrowing Assad.

These three nations are all apparently poised for a ground invasion of Syria just as, by no coincidence, the Syrian Arab Army with Russian air cover is pushing to liberate perhaps the greatest prize in the Syrian civil war — Aleppo, the country’s commercial capital. The Russians and Syrians have already cut off Turkey’s supply lines to rebels in the city.

The U.S. cannot stand by and watch Russia win in Syria. At the very least it wants to be on the ground to meet them at a modern-day Elbe and influence the outcome.

But things could go wrong in a war in which the U.S. and Russia are not allies, as they were in World War II. Despite this, the U.S. and its allies see Syria as important enough to risk confrontation with Russia, with all that implies. It is not at all clear though what the U.S. interests are in Syria to take such a risk.

From the outset of Russia’s intervention the U.S. and its allies have wanted Moscow out of the Syrian theater. They seem to be only waiting for the right opportunity. That opportunity may be now — forced by events.

Former U.S. national security adviser and current Obama adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski said last October in the Financial Times that, “The Russian naval and air presences in Syria are vulnerable, isolated geographically from their homeland. They could be ‘disarmed’ if they persist in provoking the U.S.”

Turkey’s downing in November of a Russian warplane that allegedly veered 17 seconds into Turkish territory appeared to be very much a provocation to draw Russia into a conflict to allow NATO to drive Moscow out of Syrian skies. But Russia was too smart for that and instead imposed sanctions on Turkey, while urging Russian tourists not to visit the country, which has hurt the Turkish economy.

A Battleground of Empires

As a fertile crossroad between Asia and Africa backed by desert, Syrian territory has been fought over for centuries. Pharaoh Ramses II defeated the Hittites at the Battle of Kadesh near Lake Homs in 1247 BCE. The Persians conquered Syria in 538 BCE. Alexander the Great took it 200 years later and the Romans grabbed Syria in 64 BCE.

Islam defeated the Byzantine Empire there at the Battle of Yarmuk in 636. In one of the first Shia-Sunni battles, Ali failed to defeat Muawiyah in 657 at Siffin along the Euphrates near the Iraq-Syria border. Damascus became the seat of the Caliphate until a coup in 750 moved it to Baghdad.

Waves of Crusaders next invaded Syria beginning in 1098. Egyptian Mamluks took the country in 1250 and the Ottoman Empire began in 1516 at its victory at Marj Dabik, 44 kilometers north of Aleppo — about where Turkish supplies are now being cut off. France double-crossed the Arabs and gained control of Syria in 1922 after the Ottoman collapse.

We may be now looking at an epic war with similar historical significance. All these previous battles, as momentous as they were, were regional in nature.

What we are potentially facing is a war that goes beyond the Soviet-U.S. proxy wars of the Cold War era, and beyond the proxy war that has so far taken place in the five-year Syrian civil war. Russia is already present in Syria. The entry of the United States and its allies would risk a direct confrontation between the two largest nuclear powers on earth.

Joe Lauria is a veteran foreign-affairs journalist based at the U.N. since 1990. He has written for the Boston Globe, the London Daily Telegraph, the Johannesburg Star, the Montreal Gazette, the Wall Street Journal and other newspapers. He can be reached atjoelauria@gmail.com and followed on Twitter at @unjoe.

[lunarmoth]

Heard today (here in Greece) that the Chinese have a large warship off the coast of Syria ready to unload troops at any moment.

[seemslikeadream]

UAE Says It's Prepared to Send Ground Forces to Syria
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESSFEB. 7, 2016, 7:30 A.M. E.S.T.

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — A top official in the United Arab Emirates said Sunday that his country is prepared to send ground troops to Syria to fight Islamic State militants as part of an international coalition.

Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash made the comments in the federal capital of Abu Dhabi, days after Saudi Arabia said it is ready to deploy ground forces if leaders of the U.S.-led international coalition fighting the group call for it.

Gargash said it has been the Emirates' long-held position that a campaign to defeat the group "has to include ground elements," though his latest comments took on added weight in light of Riyadh's pledge last week.

"We have been frustrated at the slow pace of confronting Daesh," Gargash said in response to a question from The Associated Press, using the Arabic acronym for IS.

He stressed that any deployment would be relatively small, saying that "We're not talking about thousands of troops."

"We are talking about troops on the ground that will lead the way, that will train, that will support and so forth. And I think our position remains the same and we will have to see how this progresses," he said. "Of course an American leadership in this effort is a prerequisite also."

Saudi Arabia's military spokesman said late Thursday that the kingdom is determined to defeat the Islamic State group and could provide ground troops if coalition members agree to such a deployment when defense ministers meet in Brussels later this month.

Saudi Arabia and the Emirates are the two largest Arab economies and boast some of the region's most powerful militaries. They are close allies and are the driving force behind a Saudi-led coalition fighting on the side of Yemen's internationally recognized government against Iranian-supported Shiite rebels in Yemen.

Syria: NATO’s Last Desperate Options in Lost Proxy War. Conventional Warfare, Ground Operations?

By Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, February 07, 2016

As Syrian forces and their allies complete the encirclement of Syria’s largest city, Aleppo, the United States and its regional allies have signaled a sudden increased interest in ground operations in Syria, including US airpower backing Turkish-Saudi ground forces.

While it is obvious the US and its allies are responding directly to the collapse of their proxy forces across the country, their most recent threats to further escalate the conflict in Syria are tenuously predicated on “fighting ISIS.”

The Guardian in its article, “Saudi Arabia offers to send ground troops to Syria to fight Isis,” would report:

Saudi Arabia has offered for the first time to send ground troops to Syria to fight Islamic State, its defence ministry said on Thursday.

“The kingdom is ready to participate in any ground operations that the coalition (against Isis) may agree to carry out in Syria,” said military spokesman Brigadier General Ahmed al-Asiri during an interview with al-Arabiya TV news.

Saudi sources told the Guardian that thousands of special forces could be deployed, probably in coordination with Turkey.

In reality, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have played a central role in both the intentional creation of ISIS and the logistical and financial perpetuation of its activities within Syria and Iraq. This is not according only to enemies of Ankara and Riyadh, but according to their central most ally, the United States.

As early as 2012, a Department of Intelligence Agency (DIA) document (.pdf) admitted in regards to the Syrian conflict and the rise of ISIS that:

If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).

Mention of this “Salafist” (Islamic) “principality” (State) in 2012 is clearly when it was decided to transform US, Saudi, and Turkish-backed Al Qaeda affiliates – then called “rebels” – officially into ISIS. To clarify just who these “supporting powers” were supporting its creation, the DIA report explains:

The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition; while Russia, China, and Iran support the regime.

12650827_778554548917155_8689633179023108730_nIt is clear then, that this sudden interest in escalation has nothing to do with ISIS and more to do with rescuing the West’s proxy terrorists before they are entirely eradicated and/or expelled from the country. Russia, who has played a pivotal role in reversing the tides against Al Qaeda and ISIS militants in Syria, has even gone as far as accusing Turkey of what appears to be an imminent military incursion into the country’s northern region.

Reuters would report in its article, “Russia and Turkey trade accusations over Syria,” that:

Russia said on Thursday it suspected Turkey was preparing a military incursion into Syria, as a Syrian army source said Aleppo would soon be encircled by government forces with Russian air support.

ISIS, as it has always been designed to be, serves merely as a pretext for justifying any prospective operation by the US and its regional allies – an operation that will be in all reality aimed at challenging and rolling back Syrian and Russian gains on the battlefield – or at the very least, providing an unassailable sanctuary within Syrian territory for the West’s defeated proxies to retreat to.
The Buffer Zone (Again)

The idea of carving out a buffer zone from Syrian territory also goes back as far as 2012 when it became apparent that Libya-style regime change would be difficult if not impossible to achieve quickly. The idea would be to switch from the fast paced, overwhelming proxy war the US and its allies had hoped to panic Damascus out from power with, to a more paced proxy war launched from NATO-occupied “safe havens” in Syria.

With NATO aircover, terrorists could safely launch operations deeper into Syrian territory, slowly expanding both the buffer zone and NATO’s defacto no-fly zone.

Eventually, it was planned, the buffer zones would lead directly to the collapse of the government in Damascus.

Again, far from a conspiracy theory, this plan was openly discussed within policy circles in Washington.

The Brookings Institution – a corporate-funded policy think-tank whose policymakers have helped craft upper-level strategy for the Iraqi, Afghan, Libyan, and now Syrian conflicts as well as plans laid for future confrontations with Iran and beyond – has been explicit regarding the true nature of these “buffer zones.” In a recent paper titled, “Deconstructing Syria: A new strategy for America’s most hopeless war,” it states:

…the idea would be to help moderate elements establish reliable safe zones within Syria once they were able. American, as well as Saudi and Turkish and British and Jordanian and other Arab forces would act in support, not only from the air but eventually on the ground via special forces.

The paper goes on by explaining (emphasis added) :

The end-game for these zones would not have to be determined in advance. The interim goal might be a confederal Syria, with several highly autonomous zones and a modest (eventual) national government. The confederation would likely require support from an international peacekeeping force, if this arrangement could ever be formalized by accord. But in the short term, the ambitions would be lower—to make these zones defensible and governable, to help provide relief for populations within them, and to train and equip more recruits so that the zones could be stabilized and then gradually expanded.

Su-35-Russian-airforce-fighter24In many ways, this has been attempted already to one degree or another in terrorist-occupied territory in Syria. As Syrian forces with Russian aircover moved into northern Aleppo, reports across the Western media complained that infrastructure underwritten by Western governments was being destroyed. This infrastructure, including bakeries literally run by Al Qaeda using flour supplied by the US government, was part of Brookings’ plan to “make these zones governable.”

The presence of Russian military forces in Syria has apparently prevented the West from making these zones more “defensible” through the use of direct military force aimed at Syrian troops.

How this plan will manifest itself now remains to be seen. What is most likely is a limited incursion into northern Syria into the shrinking Afrin-Jarabulus corridor before Syrian, Russian, and Kurdish forces completely fill the void. With Turkish and Saudi forces holding even a small percentage of the corridor, attempts to incrementally expand it as envisioned by Brookings may be made in the near to intermediate future.

Brookings had also envisioned coordinating Turkish operations in the north with an Israeli attack in the south – another option that is likely still being considered.

There is also the possibility of the West attempting to enter and seize a sizable piece of Syrian territory Syria’s eastern most region- linking it up with territory in Iraq that appears likely to be stripped from the central government in Baghdad through similar tactics.

Best Case Scenario is Still Defeat + Costly Long-Term Standoff

The most likely result, however, would be a Golan Heights-style stand-off that could last years, if not decades.

Syria would still be able to restore peace and order across the vast majority of its territory, liquidate the West’s proxies within their borders, and perhaps operate proxies of their own within seized territory – creating a costly conflict politically, financially, and militarily for Turkey.

For Saudi Arabia, the further stretching of its military forces would strain operational preparedness within the Kingdom, and further diminish its fighting capacity amid its war of aggression against neighboring Yemen. It is also another opportunity to expose inherent weaknesses in its military capabilities, further emboldening the growing arc of opposition challenging its influence throughout the Middle East.

Worst Case Scenario Threatens US Hegemony

The worst case scenario includes a NATO incursion into northern Syria being met by overwhelming resistance, blunting both its air and ground forces. With the majority of Turkish and Saudi military equipment originating in the US and Europe, it would in turn further weaken the illusion of Western military superiority upon the global stage. This could have significant impact on the integrity of both the European Union and the NATO alliance, as well as on prospective members seeking to join either or both in the near to intermediate future.

With the endgame approaching fast in Syria, Damascus and its allies may seek to invest heavily in making this second, worst case scenario the most likely outcome of any US-Turkish-Saudi incursion into northern Syria. By doing so, they may deter such a move from even being made in the first place, or the consequences unimaginable for the West should they try despite the obvious risks.

Since the prospect of a buffer zone being carved out of Syrian territory in the event of a failed regime change operation against Damascus has been literally years in the making – it is sincerely hoped that significant measures have been planned by Syria and its allies to counter it for just as long.

[Occult Means Hidden]

Great lesson in reading comprehension.

Again, far from a conspiracy theory, this plan was openly discussed within policy circles in Washington.

The Brookings Institution – a corporate-funded policy think-tank whose policymakers have helped craft upper-level strategy for the Iraqi, Afghan, Libyan, and now Syrian conflicts as well as plans laid for future confrontations with Iran and beyond – has been explicit regarding the true nature of these “buffer zones.” In a recent paper titled, “Deconstructing Syria: A new strategy for America’s most hopeless war,” it states:

…the idea would be to help moderate elements establish reliable safe zones within Syria once they were able. American, as well as Saudi and Turkish and British and Jordanian and other Arab forces would act in support, not only from the air but eventually on the ground via special forces.

The paper goes on by explaining (emphasis added) :

The end-game for these zones would not have to be determined in advance. The interim goal might be a confederal Syria, with several highly autonomous zones and a modest (eventual) national government. The confederation would likely require support from an international peacekeeping force, if this arrangement could ever be formalized by accord. But in the short term, the ambitions would be lower—to make these zones defensible and governable, to help provide relief for populations within them, and to train and equip more recruits so that the zones could be stabilized and then gradually expanded.

Another attempt at a smoking gun that falls flat. Firstly, i'm not so sure there is anything wrong with creating a safe zone for moderate elements within Syria. I know the Syrian refugees would sure as hell appreciate it. Secondly the Brookings Institution does not equal the U.S. Government. Although i'm fully aware of the revolving door history there, analysts of any "political persuasion" are free to issue any kind of analysis. Yes, they tend to be more conservative because liberals generally do not try to join the CIA as analysts.

There are institutional uproars when their papers are seen as being politicized. Decision makers are not necessarily influenced by these analysts. Perfect example is under the Bush administration, the sheer number of intel analysts who were not of the opinion that Iraq had WMD, but the decision makers did their own thing. Back then all those analysts were heroes, right?

The paper then goes on with their hypotheticals, "The end-game for these zones would not have to be determined in advance. The interim goal might be a confederal Syria, with several highly autonomous zones and a modest (eventual) national government. The confederation would likely require support from an international peacekeeping force, if this arrangement could ever be formalized by accord." This is what analysts do. They analyze likely or fairly likely scenarios. An analyst DOES NOT EQUAL a decision maker. Yes, sometimes they associate and sometimes they share occupations. There are plenty that do not advocate any involvement in Syria like the State Dept analyst who suggested "grave danger" if the West became involved in eastern Syria. That analysts' paper wasn't just ignored, it was twisted by the delusional looking for any shred of a smoking gun linking the United States to Syria's Civil War. (I'll produce a citation of this upon request.)

Not all of the world's evil assholes belong to the United States. There seem to be a plethora in this region we are focusing our discussion on.

[seemslikeadream]

NationalLogo
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2016 | RABEA AL THANI 27, 1437


20,000 Syrians flee to Turkish border as new humanitarian disaster unfolds
Syrians wait to enter Turkey at the Bab Al Salama border gate on February 5, 2016. Depo Photos via AP
20,000 Syrians flee to Turkish border as new humanitarian disaster unfolds
February 5, 2016 Updated: February 5, 2016 11:20 PM

BEIRUT // Up to 20,000 Syrians were waiting on the Turkish border on Friday after fleeing a major Russian-backed regime offensive near Aleppo where a new humanitarian disaster appeared to be unfolding.

It came as the main Syrian opposition’s chief negotiator said the group was unlikely to return to Geneva to take part in indirect peace talks because of Damascus and Russia’s “arrogant” and “merciless” bombardment campaign.

Tens of thousands of civilians have joined an exodus to escape fierce fighting involving government forces who severed the rebels’ main supply route into Syria’s second city.

On Friday, clashes between the two sides in and around Ratyan, a town near Aleppo, killed 120 people, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based monitoring group.

The UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said it estimated “up to 20,000 people have gathered at the Bab Al Salama border crossing and another 5,000 to 10,000 people have been displaced to Azaz city” nearby.

Sheikha Lubna Bint Khalid Al Qasimi, Minister of International Cooperation and Development and Head of the UAE Committee for the Coordination of Humanitarian Foreign Aid, said at a donor conference on Thursday that the international community needs to provide support to Syria’s neighbouring countries, which have received large numbers of displaced people since the start of the crisis.

The Syrian people lack the minimum basic necessities for life, she was quoted as saying by state news agency Wam, adding that “the international community needs to work together to formulate a common framework to deal with the crisis and strengthen cooperation channels and support capabilities of international humanitarian organisations”.

Since 2012 UAE humanitarian aid given to Syrians affected by the war has exceeded Dh2.2 billion.

Several countries have accused the Syrian government of sabotaging peace talks that collapsed this week with its military offensive. Saudi foreign minister Adel Al Jubeir said the government had refused to cooperate with UN envoy Staffan de Mistura.

On Friday, meanwhile, Nato head Jens Stoltenberg warned that Russian air strikes were “undermining the efforts to find a political solution”.

The Syrian Observatory, which relies on a network of sources on the ground, estimates that 40,000 people have fled the regime offensive near Aleppo.

OCHA spokeswoman Linda Tom said that in addition to the thousands at the border, another 10,000 people were estimated to have been displaced to the Kurdish town of Afrin, elsewhere in northern Aleppo.

“The fighting has also disrupted major aid and supply routes from the Turkish border,” she said.

Aleppo province is one of the main strongholds of Syria’s opposition, which is facing possibly its worst moment since the country’s brutal conflict began in 2011.

“The trajectory for the rebels is downwards, and the downwards slope is increasingly steep,” said Emile Hokayem, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

“The rebels are on the retreat everywhere.”

Turkish prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu said on Thursday that up to 70,000 people were heading to his country, which already hosts about 2.5 million Syrian refugees.

More than 260,000 people have died in Syria’s conflict and more than half the population has been displaced.

Aleppo city, Syria’s former economic powerhouse, has been divided between opposition control in the east and regime control in the west since mid-2012.

Syria’s army has been on the offensive since staunch government ally Russia began an aerial campaign in support of regime forces on September 30.

Since then, the regime has recaptured several key rebel towns in Latakia province – president Bashar Al Assad’s coastal heartland – and advanced in Aleppo province and in Daraa in the south.

The losses have angered and demoralised Syria’s opposition.

Heard today (here in Greece) that the Chinese have a large warship off the coast of Syria ready to unload troops at any moment.

China preparing to ‘team up with Russia in Syria’: Report
BY AT EDITOR on OCTOBER 9, 2015 in ASIA TIMES NEWS & FEATURES, CHINA, MIDDLE EAST


CHINA could be on the verge of teaming up with Russia to unleash its military might in Syria and destroy Islamic State. Rumors of Chinese carrier deployment.

By Rob Virtue

Russia has carried out a series of deadly airstrikes against the terrorist group over the last few days and Vladimir Putin has now sent the country’s most elite special forces team into the war zone.

And speculation is heightening that offensive will be bolstered by the China’s People’s Liberation Army, following a number of reports of military movements in the region backed up by strong words from a senior government member at a United Nations meeting.

Reports emanating from the Middle East last week said China was planning on joining the fight against ISIS “in the coming weeks”, according to a Syrian army official.

While Beijing insists it will abide by the United Nations (UN) in the region, hints of an action were backed up when it spoke strongly about a coordinated response to the rising terrorist threat.

Speaking of the Syrian crisis China’s foreign minister Wang Yi said at the UN Security Council session in New York: “The world cannot afford to stand by and look on with folded arms, but must also not arbitrarily interfere.”

He added that nations should stand united against “violent extremist ideology”.

Mr Wang and his opposite number in Russia, Sergey Lavrov met at length last week and afterwards Mr Lavrov said the two countries are in “similar positions” on many domestic and international issues.

China has also shown solidarity with Syria, joining Russia in vetoeing UN proposals against Bashar al-Assad, which are likely to prevent him being referred by the council to the International Criminal Court.

The latest actions at the UN conference have come amid reports, citing key military sources, Chinese warships have made their way to Syrian shores through the Suez Canal.


It was said China’s J-15 warplanes would launch from an aircraft carrier for attacks on ISIS.

Russian media followed that up by quoting Igor Morozov, a member of the Russian Federation Committee on International Affairs, confirming Chinese aircraft carrier, Lianoning, and a guided missile cruiser were heading to the area, and adding Chinese military advisers were already in the region.

Mr Morozov said: “It is known that China has joined our military operation in Syria. Read more