US troops injured after base was sabotaged with planted explosives
By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos | Responsible Statecraft | April 16, 2022
Why do we still have American troops in Syria and Iraq? That is the million dollar question that the Biden Administration has yet to answer — at least with any satisfaction — for the American people. Meanwhile, our service members continue to be targets of hostile forces for a Washington strategy no one can quite articulate.
On April 7 there were reports of “two rounds of indirect fire” on the Green Village Base in eastern Syria, which is housing U.S. troops as part of Operation Inherent Resolve. U.S. Central Command said four American service members were being evaluated for traumatic brain injury as a result.
On Thursday, however, U.S. Central Command quietly announced that there were no rockets, but “but rather the deliberate placement of explosive charges by an unidentified individual(s) at an ammunition holding area and shower facility.”
The release was brief and with no accompanying details, but the words echoed of the kind of Green-on-Blue attacks against coalition troops in Afghanistan during the height of the war there. As of 2017, according to counts, there had been more than 95 such attacks since 2012, killing 152 coalition service members and injuring 200.
There have been numerous rocket attacks against bases on which foreign soldiers, mostly Americans, are serving in Syria and Northern Iraq over the last two years. “Iranian backed militias” have been fingered in the attacks and they don’t seem to be abating, though the administration never uses the incidents to explain or even justify why our presence continues to be useful there. Is it to stave off ISIS? Bashar Assad? Iranian militias?
“The United States has no compelling national security interest in Syria to justify an open-ended ground deployment of forces,” wrote Defense Priorities’ Natalie Armbruster in March, taking on each of the existing arguments for keeping forces in the region. Now that our troops can’t even feel safe taking showers on base, isn’t it time to get a straight answer from Washington?
Biden, Zelensky and the Neocons
BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • APRIL 5, 2022
There are many backstories surfacing from what is going on in Ukraine and Washington that have been largely ignored amid the drumbeat of casualty counts combined with claims and counter-claims from the two sides. Two stories that I believe have received insufficient attention are the US government’s three decades long obsession with weakening and de facto destroying the Russian state and the dominant neocon plus associate liberal democracy promoter role in what has become American foreign policy.
To be sure, anyone who doubts that the US is currently on a course to not only replace President Vladimir Putin but also to crash the Russian economy is delusional. Washington has been trying to deconstruct the former Soviet Union ever since 1991, beginning with President Bill Clinton’s expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe in spite of a pledge not to do so and his unleashing the oligarchs who looted the country’s natural resources under President Boris Yeltsin. The pressure continued under the beatified President Barack Obama, who appointed as Ambassador Michael McFaul, who saw his mission as connecting with dissidents and opposition forces inside Russia, a role incompatible with his promotion of US interests and protecting US persons.
And then we had the redoubtable President Donald Trump undoing confidence building agreements with Russia followed by the current disaster that is unfolding before our very eyes. One should not ignore the fact that the fighting in Ukraine came about largely because the Biden Administration refused to negotiate seriously regarding the mostly reasonable demands that the Kremlin was making to enhance its own security. Former US arms inspector Scott Ritter cites a reported comment by a senior Biden Administration official which sums up the current policy, such as it is: “The only end game now is the end of Putin regime. Until then, all the time Putin stays, [Russia] will be a pariah state that will never be welcomed back into the community of nations.”
Indeed, President Joe Biden’s recent disastrous trip to Europe can likely be characterized as one wishes to see it and the media has certainly done considerable spinning, but Biden left behind a legacy of various gaffes and lapsus linguae that made clear that the US is in the game to defeat Russia however long it will take to play out. And Biden has considerable support from brain dead congressmen like Republican Senator Lindsey Graham who has called for someone to murder Putin, lamenting “Is there a Brutus in Russia?”
On his trip, Biden revealed that he expects US combat troops to go to Ukraine’s assistance and he has also taken delight in denouncing Putin as a “killer,” a “thug,” a “murderous dictator” and a “man who cannot remain in power.” In so doing, he has openly called for Putin’s removal from office, i.e. regime change, while also opening the door to an obvious false flag operation in his unwillingness to reveal when questioned by a reporter how the US might respond if Russia were to use chemical weapons in Ukraine. That he has taken those positions means that it will be impossible to restore manageable relations with Moscow post Ukraine. It is a heavy price to pay for something that is little more than posturing.
The chemical weapon issue is particularly important as President Donald Trump bombed Syria with cruise missiles in the wake of a fabricated report that Bashar al-Assad had used such weapons in an attack on Khan Shaykhun in 2017. It turned out that the anti-regime terrorists who were occupying the city at the time had themselves staged the attack and deliberately blamed it on the Syrian government to produce an expected US response.
Based on what I am seeing and hearing, I would conclude that the neoconservatives and their liberal democracy promoting friends are working hard from the inside to make something like a war with Russia happen. Note in particular that we are talking about war with shooting and deaths, not just a reincarnation or extension of the Cold War of yore. News on April 1st, admittedly April Fools’ Day, suggests that Ukraine has staged helicopter launched missile attacks on a fuel storage depot inside Russia, which, if true, could produce a massive escalation from the Kremlin. It would be a typical neocon maneuver to dramatically increase the level of the fighting and draw the United States into the conflict.
In addition to that, I know I am not the only one who has noticed the pace and focus of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskys’ widely promoted appeals to groups and world governments to come to his country’s aid, to include establishment of a no-fly zone. The appeals are slick, convincing and carefully focused, with Zelensky being framed as a “hero” fighting valiantly against savage invaders. To put it mildly they are way beyond the capabilities and experience level of a former comedian, whose performances featured erotic dancing and playing a piano with his penis, corruptly placed on the presidential hotseat by a billionaire oligarch Israeli citizen.
The US media is, of course, lavishly praising Zelensky, but I would bet that he has a cadre of American and possibly Israeli neoconservatives working diligently behind him to get it right, coaching him on what to say and do. There might be US government players also in on the act, to include NED (National Endowment for Democracy), CIA information specialists, State Department media consultants and observers from the National Security Council. Indeed, there is as much a war going on over the airwaves and internet to influence thinking internationally as there is fighting taking place on the ground.
One should conclude that the CIA is playing the central role in the “Russia Project” because of its ability to shield what it is doing from scrutiny. Based on previous operations to overthrow governments in various places, one might assume that the so-called covert action approach is multi-level. It consists of media placements that are intended to sway opinion both inside and outside Russia and produce unrest, the identification and recruitment of Russian government officials when they travel overseas, and the support of dissidents both internally and externally who share a negative view of Moscow and its policies. A major component in the approach is to obtain Western liberal support for harsh sanctions and other repressive measures against the Kremlin based on the fraudulent proposition that Putin and his associates are out to destroy “democracy” and “freedom.” Ironically, Americans are less “free” and also poorer because of the actions of their own government since 2001, not because of Vladimir Putin.
As was the case with Iraq, Afghanistan and the long list of American interventions, it is the neocons who are in front demanding a powerful military response, both to Russia and, inevitably, to Iran. What is particularly noticeable is how the neocons and their liberal democracy promoting counterparts have in several areas dominated the foreign policies of both parties. Leading neocon Bill Kristol, who called the Biden speech “a historic call to action on par with Ronald Reagan[‘s] ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall speech,’” recently also contributed “There would be no real prospect of an awakening in the United States and Europe were it not for the stand the Ukrainians have made. We would still be denying the threats we face. We would still be turning away from the urgency of the task we face. We would even, I daresay, still fail to appreciate the preciousness of the freedom and decency we have the obligation—and the honor—to defend. It is the Ukrainians who have shown us what free men and women can do, and what they are sometimes required to do, in defense of that freedom. It is the Ukrainians who have shown the world that we are in a new period of consequences. It is the Ukrainians who have given us the example of what it means today to fight back against brutality, and to fight for freedom.”
Kristol is, as so often, full of flag waving, chest puffing nonsense, peddling the notion that the United States has an obligation to police the world. Another leading neocon and regular Washington Post and The Atlantic contributor Anne Applebaum puts it this way and in so doing expands the playing field to include much of the world: “Unless democracies defend themselves together, the forces of autocracy will destroy them. I am using the word forces, in the plural, deliberately. Many American politicians would understandably prefer to focus on the long-term competition with China. But as long as Russia is ruled by Putin, then Russia is at war with us too. So are Belarus, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, Nicaragua, Hungary, and potentially many others.”
It would be nice, for a change, to end an article on a high note, but high notes are hard to find these days. If there is anything beyond Ukraine to demonstrate the insanity of US foreign policy it would have to be, inevitably, recent news out of Israel. US Secretary of State Tony Blinken was recently in Israel trying in part to sell the possibility that the Biden Administration might actually come to a non-proliferation agreement with Iran over its nuclear program. Israel strongly opposes any such move and its lobby in the US led by various neocon think tanks has been working hard to kill any deal. So, what did Blinken do? He asked Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett for suggestions of what might be done in lieu of an actual agreement. Naftali reportedly suggested harsher sanctions on Iran. Cut it any way you want, but the renewal of 2015’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is beneficial for both the United States and all of Iran’s neighbors, and here the US senior-most representative involved in the negotiations is asking the head of a foreign government to tell him what to do. Something is very wrong in Washington.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
UK plans to designate Yemen’s Houthis as terrorists risk disaster warns aid agencies
MEMO | April 3, 2022
The British government’s plans to designate Yemen’s Houthi movement as a terrorist group risk worsening the humanitarian crisis in the country, leading aid agencies have warned in a letter to cabinet ministers.
According to a report yesterday by The Guardian, 11 British aid agencies, including Save the Children, Care, the International Rescue Committee and Islamic Relief sent the letter upon being informed that Home Secretary Priti Patel was pushing for the designation under the Terrorism Act as part of a review of British policy in Yemen.
There are fears that the move, described as a “blunt tool” could hamper aid efforts in the country, already on the brink of famine, as international banks and companies that import food, medicines and fuel could be impacted by terrorism laws, especially as the Houthi-led, de-facto government based in Sanaa control the most densely populated areas in the north.
“The likely ‘chilling effect’ on banks and other commercial actors could prove catastrophic for the millions of Yemenis already at risk from hunger, conflict and disease,” the letter stated.
“Grain importers and banks told humanitarian agencies they are unsure if they will be able to continue supplying Yemen if the UK proceeds with proscription of Ansar Allah,” the aid agencies explained, referring to the formal name of the Houthi group.
“[If] banks were to refuse transfers because of UK proscription, this would likely have a serious impact on remittances, which are a lifeline for 500,000 Yemeni families. Up to one in 10 Yemenis rely on remittances to meet their essential needs. They are the biggest source of foreign exchange into the country, making up 20% of the country’s GDP. More than 100,000 Yemenis living in the UK would no longer be able to support their loved ones.”
However, the plans have received the support of some of the Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia and the UAE who have been hit by cross-border attacks by the Houthis. Both are joint-leaders of the Arab coalition which militarily intervened in the country in 2015 at the request of the internationally-recognised Yemeni government following the fall of Sanaa to the Houthi forces and their military allies the year before.
Last year the Houthis were listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation towards the end of former US President Donald Trump’s administration, which was condemned by human rights groups at the time who warned it could further exacerbate the humanitarian crisis. However, President Joe Biden formally delisted the movement amid announcements that the US would end its support for the Saudi-led war. Earlier this year, Biden said he would consider relisting the Houthis as a terrorist group and it has become a source of tensions between Washington and its Gulf allies, Saudi and the UAE.
US resets the containment of Iran
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | MARCH 28, 2022
The summit of Arab diplomats on March 27-28 hosted by Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid in the southern Negev Desert is doubtless a landmark event. The UAE’s Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Bahrain’s Abdullatif bin Rashid Al-Zayani, Morocco’s Nasser Bourita, and Egypt’s Sameh Shoukry are the Arab participants, while the visiting US Secretary of State Antony Blinken becomes the sole “extra-regional” participant.
The expectation that more West Asian countries would join the Abraham Accords failed to materialise, but the security and military ties between Israel, UAE, Bahrain — and Saudi Arabia behind the curtain — have deepened. Egypt also joins the nascent partnership.
There is much symbolism surrounding the venue of the Arab-Israeli summit: Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, lived at Sde Boker and he is buried there, overlooking the Zin wilderness. Lapid hopes to take his guests to visit the gravesite.
To be sure, wherever Blinken goes, the agenda would include Ukraine conflict and he is sure to make a pitch for isolating Russia and urge his Arab interlocutors to join Western efforts in support of Ukraine, but it has had limited success even with his Israeli hosts, much less so with the US’ Arab allies.
For a variety of reasons, Israel is wary of antagonising Russia (although under US pressure it set up a field hospital inside Ukrainian territory to treat those injured by Russian forces and has also sent several shipments of humanitarian supplies to the war zone.) Israel has refused repeated requests from Kiev for weapons.
Israel also opted out of imposing sanctions against Russian oligarchs. This rankles the Biden administration. The acerbic tongue of US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland lashed out during a Channel 12 interview, “You (Israel) don’t want to become the last haven for dirty money that’s fuelling Putin’s wars.”
Israel ignored her barb. Israel sought a mediatory role in the conflict initially but lately stepped back, and, at any rate , Russia does not really need mediators to bring this conflict to an end once its special operation is successfully concluded. On the whole, Israel tries to walk a tightrope to maintain good relations with both Ukraine and Russia.
As for Gulf states, they do not even pretend to take a neutral stance. None of them has rallied to the western call to impose sanctions against Russia. The foreign ministers of Qatar and the UAE visited Moscow recently to discuss expansion of bilateral relations.
The crux of the matter is that the major oil producing countries of the Gulf would have congruence of interests with Russia to preserve OPEC+ not only to maintain their present income level, but also are in anticipation of the lifting of US sanctions against Iran leading to full flow of Iranian crude back into the global oil markets.
The point is, Iran remains a great oil power, with an estimated 157 billion barrels of proven crude oil reserves, nearly 10 percent of the world’s total and 13 percent of those held by the OPEC. Its habitation within the OPEC+ is an absolute must for all oil producing countries. Now, Russia has a major role to play to leverage both short-term and longer-term bearish effects of Iran’s entry on global oil prices.
Experts estimate that Iran could see an 80 percent recovery of full oil production within six months and a 100 percent recovery within 12 months, and in the immediate terms, once sanctions are lifted, its overnight impact may already manifest as a 5-10 percent fall in the oil prices.
Nonetheless, Ukraine conflict aside, the real significance of the Israel-Arab diplomatic summit in the Negev Desert should be sought somewhere else. Prima facie, it is a diplomatic coup for Israel, as its efforts to integrate into the Arab family are making progress. What lends enchantment to the view is that this bucks the overall trend of the US’ regional influence in West Asia.
Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s accent on diplomacy to win friends and influence neighbours is proving productive and Israel is no longer depending on the US to cut new paths for it to navigate as a regional state. This is a paradigm shift.
Principally, Israel taps into the angst in the Arab world that Iran is poised to surge as a regional power very shortly and the future trajectory of Iranian policies remain unclear. In fact, this is the leitmotif of the diplomatic event in the Negev Desert.
In immediate terms, Israel and the Arab states believe that the intensifying drone attacks by the Houthis lately is only possible with the help and even participation by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which provides missiles, rockets, drones, intelligence equipment and training. They apprehend that Iran’s resistance politics are signalling a new cutting edge, as the recent missile strike on alleged Israeli assets in Erbil in northern Iraq showed.
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE have been depending on US-made anti-missile defences, mainly the Patriot systems, but their performance so far has been less than satisfactory. Thus, a stunning idea has taken shape lately in the nature of building an architecture of “joint air defences” between Israel, the UAE, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.
After all, Israel has the expertise in developing a multi-layered air defence system devolving upon the famous Iron Dome, David’s Sling systems (which can intercept missiles up to 200km away) and Arrow batteries, which are capable of intercepting and destroying long-range missiles at ranges of up to 2,000km, including ballistic missiles. The three layers of Israeli systems are integrated and assisted by advanced radars and other early warnings equipment.
Interestingly, coincidence or not, the Israeli air defences are also linked to a powerful American radar, stationed in the Negev Desert which is where the Arab diplomats from Egypt, Bahrain and the UAE have gathered for the 2-day event.
Blinken’s mission at the summit is principally to get the regional allies accustomed to the imminent conclusion of the negotiations at Vienna leading to the removal of US sanctions against Iran. The Biden administration is yet to take the plunge on lifting the designation of the IRGC as a “Foreign Terrorist Organisation”. The US’s regional allies, especially Israel, have opposed such a move tooth and nail.
But the US has a sense of urgency about Iran’s increased oil output entering the world market. That said, however, Washington’s containment policy against Iran is not going to be mothballed. Rather, it will continue in a newer form. In fact, the lifting of sanctions without any reciprocal assurances from Tehran as regards its regional policies necessitates that the containment strategy will have to remain as the US’ geopolitical tool for the foreseeable future.
The Arab-Israeli summit with Blinken’s participation underscores that the US-Iran entanglement is being reset. There is no question that the JCPOA is of vital importance to check Iran’s nuclear programme. Israel also tends to go along with that thinking lately. The Abraham Accords is providing the foundation for a new US-backed security architecture in West Asia to counter Iran.
Zelensky and the Zionist Plot To Provoke Russia
NAUMAN SADIQ | BLACKLISTED NEWS | MARCH 15, 2022
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky took to Twitter [1] Sunday to express heartfelt gratitude to Facebook owner Mark Zuckerberg for taking a clear stand on the Ukraine crisis and letting users violate rules against hate speech: “War is not only a military opposition on UA land. It is also a fierce battle in the informational space. I want to thank @Meta and other platforms that have an active position that help and stand side by side with the Ukrainians.”
“As a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine we have temporarily made allowances for forms of political expression that would normally violate our rules like violent speech such as ‘death to the Russian invaders.’ We still won’t allow credible calls for violence against Russian civilians,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement [2] March 11.
It naturally piques the curiosity why the social media behemoth is bending over backwards to violate its own longstanding regulations against hate speech to let Zelensky win the propaganda war in “the informational space” unless one takes into account the obvious fact that both Zuckerberg and Zelensky are Zionist Jews and take orders from Israel’s clandestine security agencies.
Born to Oleksandr Zelensky and Rymma Zelenska, both Russian-speaking Jews, in Jan. 1978, Volodymyr Zelensky was groomed by covert Mossad operatives in Ukraine since his student life while he was studying law at the Kryvyi Rih National University.
Instead of pursuing legal career, he chose acting as a profession at the behest of his influential patrons to gain nationwide publicity, particularly through the comedy television series “Servant of the People” in which Zelensky “prophetically played” the role of the Ukrainian president.
In fact, his production company Kvartal 95, which produces films, cartoons and television shows, was generously funded by deep pockets of Zionist billionaires. Comically exposing corruption and sleazy dealings of Ukraine’s politicians and oligarchs, the series “Servant of the People” aired from 2015 to 2019 and struck a chord with Ukrainian masses.
Riding on the wave of media publicity, Zelensky won a landslide presidential election in 2019. Later, his political party, which he “coincidentally” named “Servant of the People,” won an overwhelming victory in a snap legislative election held shortly after his inauguration as president.
In the 2001 census, a third of Ukraine’s over 40 million population registered Russian as their first language. In fact, Russian speakers constitute a majority in urban areas of industrialized eastern Ukraine and socio-culturally identify with Russia. Ukrainian speakers are mainly found in sparsely populated western Ukraine and in rural areas of east Ukraine.
Russian, Belarusian and Ukrainian together belong to the East Slavic family of languages and share a degree of mutual intelligibility. Thus, Russians, Byelorussians and Ukrainians are one nation and one country whose shared history and culture goes all the way back to the golden period of 10th century Kyivan Rus’.
What do Ukrainians have in common with NATO powers, their newfound patrons, besides the fact that humanitarian imperialists are attempting to douse fire by pouring gasoline on Ukraine’s proxy war by providing caches of lethal weapons to militant forces holding disenfranchised Ukrainian masses hostage.
Russians and Ukrainians share Byzantine heritage and their longstanding dispute with Zionist Jews goes back to the medieval era. Byzantine emperors regarded Jewish subjects as gentiles and were particularly wary of wealthy Jewish merchants maintaining a stranglehold over banking and commerce sectors of the empire.
In addition, Russians and Ukrainians together belong to the Greek Orthodox Church, one of the oldest Christian denominations whose history goes all the way back to Christ and his apostles. Protestantism and Catholicism are products of the second millennium after a Roman bishop of the Byzantine Empire declared himself pope following the 1054 schism between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches.
Since 2019, after being elected president through questionable methods, Zelensky has surreptitiously been working on a clandestine project to foment a crisis with Russia on a flimsy pretext. Any other political leader with an iota of rational faculties, even somebody as rogue as his predecessor Petro Poroshenko, would promptly have agreed to the Kremlin’s reasonable proposal that Kyiv must give a solemn pledge it won’t join the transatlantic NATO military alliance.
Not only did he scornfully rebuff the Russian proposal but he also let Ukraine’s security forces stage joint military exercises and naval drills alongside NATO forces in the Black Sea right under Russia’s nose. His reckless disregard for the suffering of Ukrainian masses with whom he does not identify being a Zionist himself and suicidally provoking Russia into an armed confrontation aside, he is merely a pawn in the grand scheme of things.
Israel’s Zionist regime, to whom not only Ukrainian but also American presidents bow, has a score to settle with Russia. Donald Trump literally forced four Arab states, the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco, to sign so-called Abraham Accords lending official recognition to Israel at the coaxing of his Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner and in order to canvass Zionist lobbies for support in the run-up to Nov. 2020 presidential elections.
Washington’s principal objective in Syria’s proxy war was ensuring Israel’s regional security. The United States Defense Intelligence Agency’s declassified report [3] of 2012 clearly spelled out the imminent rise of a Salafist principality in northeastern Syria – in Raqqa and Deir al-Zor which were occupied by the Islamic State from 2014 to October 2017 – in the event of an outbreak of a civil war in Syria.
Under pressure from the Zionist lobbies in Washington, however, the Obama administration deliberately suppressed the report and also overlooked the view in general that a proxy war in Syria would give birth to radical Islamic jihadists.
The hawks in Washington were fully aware of the consequences of their actions in Syria, but they kept pursuing the ill-fated policy of nurturing militants in the training camps located in Syria’s border regions with Turkey and Jordan in order to weaken the anti-Zionist Bashar al-Assad government.
The single biggest threat to Israel’s regional security was posed by the Iranian resistance axis, comprising Iran, Syria and Lebanon-based Hezbollah. During the course of the 2006 Lebanon War, Hezbollah fired hundreds of rockets into northern Israel and Israel’s defense community realized for the first time the nature of threat that Hezbollah posed to Israel’s regional security.
Those were only unguided rockets but it was a wakeup call for Israel’s military strategists that what would happen if Iran passed the guided missile technology to Hezbollah whose area of operations lies very close to the northern borders of Israel.
Therefore, the Zionist lobbies in Washington persuaded the Obama administration to orchestrate a proxy war against Damascus and Lebanon-based Hezbollah in order to dismantle the Iranian resistance axis against Israel.
But following the beginning of the Ukraine crisis in 2014 after Russia occupied the Crimean peninsula and Washington imposed sanctions on Russia, the Kremlin’s immediate response to the escalation by Washington was that it jumped into the fray in Syria in September 2015, after a clandestine visit to Moscow by General Qassem Soleimani, the slain commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force who was assassinated in an American airstrike on a tip-off from the Israeli intelligence at the Baghdad airport on January 3, 2020.
When Russia deployed its forces and military hardware to Syria in September 2015, the militant proxies of Washington, the Zionist regime and their regional clients were on the verge of driving a wedge between Damascus and the Alawite heartland of coastal Latakia, which could have led to the imminent downfall of the Bashar al-Assad government.
With the help of Russia’s air power and long-range artillery, the Syrian government has since reclaimed most of Syria’s territory from the insurgents, excluding Idlib in the northwest occupied by Turkish-backed militants and Deir al-Zor and the Kurdish-held areas in the east, thus inflicting a humiliating defeat on Washington, the Zionist regime and their regional allies, Turkey, Jordan and the Gulf States.
Over the years, Israel has not only provided material support to militant groups battling Damascus – particularly to various factions of the Free Syria Army (FSA) and al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate al-Nusra Front in Daraa and Quneitra bordering the Israel-occupied Golan Heights – but Israel’s air force has virtually played the role of the air force of the terrorists and mounted hundreds of airstrikes in Syria during the decade-long conflict.
In an interview to the New York Times [4] in January 2019, Israel’s former Chief of Staff Lt. General Gadi Eisenkot confessed that the Netanyahu government approved his recommendations in January 2017 to step up airstrikes in Syria. Consequently, more than 200 Israeli airstrikes were launched on the Syrian targets in 2017 and 2018, as revealed [5] by Israeli Intelligence Minister Israel Katz in September 2018.
In 2018 alone, Israel’s air force dropped 2,000 bombs in Syria. The purported rationale of the Israeli airstrikes in Syria has been to degrade Iran’s guided missile technology provided to Damascus and Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which poses an existential threat to Israel’s regional security. However, after Russia provided S-300 air defense system to the Syrian military after a Russian surveillance aircraft was shot down by Syrian air defenses during an Israeli incursion into the Syrian airspace on September 2018, killing 15 Russians onboard, Israeli airstrikes in Syria have been significantly scaled down.
Following the friendly-fire incident, though Israel has mounted occasional airstrikes at the capital Damascus, in Daraa and Quneitra in southern Syria and Deir al-Zor in eastern Syria, Israeli airstrikes in northwest Syria, including Aleppo, Hamah and Homs, which is within the range of advanced missile defense systems deployed at Khmeimim Air Base near coastal Latakia, have almost entirely ceased.
Last month, the Kremlin issued an unequivocal condemnation [6] of recent Israeli airstrikes in Syria as “crude violation” of Syria’s sovereignty that up until now were reluctantly tolerated by the Russian forces based in Syria’s Tartus naval base and Khmeimim airbase southeast of Latakia, and also pledged that the Russian Air Force would conduct joint air patrols alongside the Syrian Air Force that would pre-empt the likelihood of further Israeli airstrikes.
“Israel’s continuing strikes against targets inside Syria cause deep concern,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said. “They are a crude violation of Syria’s sovereignty and may trigger a sharp escalation of tensions. Also, such actions pose serious risks to international passenger flights.”
Although Israel claims its air campaign in Syria is meant to target Iran-backed militias, the airstrikes often kill Syrian soldiers. Syrian state media said one soldier was killed and five more were wounded in one of the latest Israeli attacks at Damascus, which occurred on Feb. 9.
Russia has held talks with Israel on Syria, and said last month it would begin joint air patrols with Syria. The patrols will include areas near the Golan Heights in southern Syria bordering Israel, a frequent site of the Israeli airstrikes, and Israel is said to be considering discontinuing the strikes altogether or slowing them down significantly.
The Times of Israel noted that this marked a momentous change in policy for Russia: “Following the patrol, Ynet reported that Israeli military officials were holding talks with Russian army officers to calm tensions.”
The report added, “Israeli officials were struggling to understand why Russia, which announced that such joint patrols were expected to be a regular occurrence moving forward, had apparently changed its policy toward Israel.” The report claimed that Israel might limit its air campaign in Syria as a result of Russia’s inexplicable policy reversal in Syria.
In conclusion, it favored Israel’s strategic objectives to escalate the conflict in Ukraine in order to divert Russia’s attention and military resources to Eastern Europe, as the Zionist regime would then get a free hand to mount airstrikes in Syria and Lebanon with impunity, and might even attempt to rekindle the decade-long proxy war alongside its Gulf Arab, Turkish and Jordanian allies in order to eliminate the security threat posed by the Iran-led resistance axis comprising Syria and Lebanon-based Hezbollah once and for all.
Citations:
[1] Zelensky tweet thanking Facebook for allowing hate speech:
[2] Facebook allows posts urging violence against Russian invaders:
[3] US Defense Intelligence Agency’s declassified report of 2012:
[4] An interview with Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, Israel’s chief of staff:
[5] Israel Katz: Israel conducted 200 airstrikes in Syria in 2017 and 2018:
[6] Russia cites ‘deep concern’ over ongoing Israeli strikes in Syria:
Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based geopolitical and national security analyst focused on geo-strategic affairs and hybrid warfare in the Af-Pak and Middle East regions. His domains of expertise include neocolonialism, military-industrial complex and petro-imperialism. He is a regular contributor of diligently researched investigative reports to alternative news media.
Moscow reveals whether US sanctions would harm Iran deal
RT | March 15, 2022
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday that Moscow has received written assurances from the US that Ukraine-related sanctions won’t hinder its ability to trade with Iran under the terms of a new nuclear agreement. “We received written guarantees. They are included in the text of the agreement itself on the resumption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear program,” Lavrov told reporters in Moscow.
The ‘Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’, or JCPOA, is the official title of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. Signed by Iran and the US, UK, Russia, France, Germany, China and the EU the deal promised Iran sanctions relief in exchange for a halt to its nuclear program. Former US President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the deal in 2018, claiming that Iran was breaching its obligations, and negotiators have been meeting in Vienna, Austria and attempting to hammer out a new deal for nearly a year now.
An unnamed US official told the Wall Street Journal on Sunday that the US was not prepared to ease any Ukraine-related sanctions to save the deal, and would be open to negotiating a “replica of the JCPOA” without Russian involvement if Moscow insisted on exemptions being made.
Commenting on the reports, Lavrov suggested that Washington itself is still not ready to support the deal, and pointed out that, according to his Iranian counterpart, the problem with the agreement is in the US’ “exorbitant demands.”
Appearing beside Lavrov on Tuesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said that there is no link between the conflict in Ukraine and the talks in Vienna.
The Iranians have repeatedly insisted that Russia remain a part of any deal.
The Vienna negotiations have been paused since last week, but an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Monday that they should resume shortly, when they will enter their “final, crucial steps.” Lavrov told reporters on Tuesday that he believes these talks are on the home stretch, and called on the US to “return to the legal framework of this nuclear deal” and lift “the illegal sanctions the US has imposed to hurt not only Iran and its people, but a number of other countries.”
‘US will scrap Iran deal before agreeing with Russia on sanctions’
RT | March 13, 2022
The US will not negotiate the easing of any Ukraine-related sanctions on Russia to ensure that Moscow can trade with Tehran under a new iteration of the Iran nuclear deal, a US official told the Wall Street Journal on Sunday. Despite a deal being reportedly close at hand, the official said that Washington would pursue an alternate agreement before granting Russia any exemptions.
“I don’t see the scope for going beyond what is within the confines of the JCPOA,” the official said, referring to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which guaranteed Iran limited sanctions relief in exchange for a halt to its nuclear program. “I think it’s pretty safe to say that there is no room for making exemptions beyond those.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has demanded written assurances that sanctions imposed on Russia since the start of its military offensive in Ukraine won’t impact any trade between Russia and Iran under a successor deal to the JCPOA, which is currently being negotiated.
Despite US Secretary of State Tony Blinken describing the Ukraine-related sanctions as “irrelevant” to the deal last week, the Iranians are apparently siding with Russia. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh stated last week that “Iran’s peaceful nuclear cooperation should not be affected or restricted by any sanctions, including Iran’s peaceful nuclear cooperation with Russia.”
According to the Wall Street Journal, Russian negotiators are likely to specify their precise demands in writing in the coming days, and the Americans will “know within a week whether or not Russia is prepared to back down,” the US official added.
Should Russia remain firm on its demands, the US would be open to negotiating a “replica of the JCPOA” without Russian involvement, the official said, noting that “we…at this point wouldn’t rule anything out.”
However, it is far from clear whether the other parties to the 2015 deal would agree to a new accord without Russia. The original agreement was signed by Iran and the US, UK, Russia, France, Germany, China and the EU. While the Wall Street Journal claimed that European diplomats are exploring “options for pursuing a deal without Russia,” China is a major nuclear power and generally a diplomatic ally of Russia, and may balk at any deal that excludes Moscow.
Negotiators have been attempting to hammer out a replacement for the JCPOA for nearly a year, meeting regularly in Austria’s capital Vienna for negotiations. The French Foreign Ministry said last week that the parties are “very close to a deal,” but admitted that disagreements between the US and Russia could scupper any potential accord. The anonymous US official echoed these concerns on Sunday, describing Russia’s demands as “the most serious stumbling block and obstacle to reaching a deal.”
NATO is trying to create irresolvable confrontation with Russia – Lavrov
By Ailis Halligan | RT | February 21, 2022
The West is attempting to incite an unavoidable confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Monday.
Speaking to his Syrian counterpart, Faisal Mekdad, Lavrov lamented that Russia is unable to focus its efforts on its relationship with the Middle Eastern country, blaming Western attempts to fan the flames of conflict in Ukraine, allegedly with the goal of encouraging war between Russia and NATO.
“The situation in the world is developing rapidly. This also applies to northern Africa and the Middle East, including Syria,” Lavrov said. “Unfortunately, our efforts with you … are affected by the atmosphere that is now being escalated our Western colleagues.”
According to Lavrov, the “Western alliance” is trying to create an “almost insurmountable confrontation” with Russia.
According to the foreign minister, Moscow wants to focus its efforts on working towards a ceasefire and political settlement in Syria.
The Russian presence in the country, at the invitation of President Bashar Assad, has been ongoing since 2015, and is aimed at aiding Damascus’ fight against extremist Islamist terrorism.
The minister also stressed that NATO attempts to spoil Russia’s reputation due to its presence in Syria would be fruitless.
“We certainly will not allow such attempts to undermine our ability to achieve concrete results,” he noted, stressing that Russia would work to strengthen Syria’s “sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence.”
In response, Mekdad revealed Syria’s support and gratitude for Russia’s efforts and echoed Lavrov’s attack on NATO.
“The campaign of hypocrisy, lies, and deception waged by the West is the same as the campaign it launched against Syria,” Mekdad said.
Lavrov is due to meet with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in Europe on Thursday to discuss options for diffusing rapidly growing tensions surrounding Ukraine. Many NATO members, including the US, have made allegations that Russia is preparing for an imminent invasion of its neighbor. The Kremlin has denied this.
Iran discloses conditions for nuclear deal revival
RT | February 20, 2022
Iran’s parliament has laid out six conditions for the country to return to the landmark 2015 nuclear deal in an open letter to President Ebrahim Raisi, published in Iranian media on Sunday. An overwhelming majority of MPs supported the statement, with 250 out of 290 parliamentarians signing the letter.
The US, as well as the European signatories of the deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), must provide guarantees that they will not abandon the agreement again should it be revived, the MPs said. They must also guarantee that no “snapback mechanisms,” which can re-enable sanctions immediately, will be activated.
“We have to learn a lesson from past experiences and put a red line on the national interest by not committing to any agreement without obtaining necessary guarantees first,” the parliamentarians said.
Other conditions include the lifting of all sanctions on Iran in full, including restrictions related to the JCPOA directly, as well as what the letter described as those imposed under “false pretexts” of terrorism, human rights abuses, and in relation to the country’s missile program. Tehran itself should also make sure it receives the economic benefits it is promised under the deal, and actually begins to receive profits from exports before returning to compliance with the restrictions outlined in the agreement, the lawmakers added.
The statement comes as the multinational talks, which have been underway in the Austrian capital, Vienna since April last year, seem to be coming to fruition. The painstaking negotiations have been interrupted multiple times by long pauses, with participants repeatedly expressing frustration over the lack of progress. Earlier this week, Tehran’s top negotiator, Ali Bagheri, said the deal was “closer than ever” – warning, however, against celebrating too soon, since “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”
The JCPOA, under which Tehran agreed to drastically curb its nuclear program (while it maintains that it never sought to obtain atomic weaponry) in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions, has been in limbo since 2018, when then-US President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the United States from the deal. Describing the agreement as the “the worst deal ever,” Trump accused Tehran of violating “the spirit” of the JCPOA, while international observers had repeatedly confirmed Iran’s compliance.
Following the withdrawal, Washington revived old sanctions and imposed new restrictions on Tehran. In retaliation, Iran has gradually suspended its JCPOA commitments, installing new uranium-enriching equipment and ramping up its nuclear program. Earlier this month, the US lifted some of its sanctions against Tehran, enabling foreign companies to partake in certain civilian projects at Iran’s Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant and other facilities. The move was widely perceived as an attempt to show goodwill and revitalize the stalled Vienna talks.


