Besieged Kurdish Towns Under Heavy Bombardment by Turkish Army
Sputnik – 03.01.2016
Kurdish neighborhoods in Silopi and Diyarbakir are under attack from Turkish military forces. Heavy tank bombardment in civilian areas is being reported.
On the 20th day of a curfew, several Silopi neighborhoods in southeastern Turkey have come under heavy gunfire from tanks and armored vehicles, according to local media.
“Residents are trying to find shelter in safe areas as the neighborhoods, which house thousands, are being targeted by heavy fire from tanks and armored vehicles that have surrounded the area under curfew,” ANF News described.
The Kurdish neighborhoods of Barbaros, Basak and Zap have introduced self-rule and have strong local self-defense, including YDG-H youth units, who are resisting government forces attempting to impose the curfew, ANF News reported. YDG-H, or Patriotic Revolutionary Youth Movement, was founded in 2013 by Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) youth members.
“People struggling with hunger and thirst take shelter in the basements of their houses. No passages are allowed out of the blockade,” People’s Democratic Party of Turkey, (HDP) reported on Saturday.
A local Kurdish official, Emine Esmer, a co-mayor of Silopi, was taken into custody and released while investigating a water shortage in the municipality, according to BestaNews.com.
Reports from the Kurdish district of Sur in Diyarbakir, also under curfew, say that tank bombardments in the residential areas intensified on Saturday, with two people injured, according to Jin News Agency.
The HDP reports that almost 200 people have been killed during the blockade and attacks by Turkish government forces. Over 100,000 people have reportedly been displaced in ongoing military actions in Turkey’s majority-Kurdish southeast.
Court Acquits Turkish Suspects Involved in Sarin Gas Supply to Syria
Fars News Agency – January 1, 2015
A Turkish court in Adana acquitted five Turkish suspects accused of procuring chemicals used in production of sarin gas, Zaman reported.
In May 2013, media reported that Turkish special service officers arrested members of Syrian opposition group who were in possession of two kilograms of sarin, Sputnik reported.
Moscow conducted a thorough investigation of the incident and expressed hope that Turkey would provide information regarding the detention of the militants. However, two months later, all detainees were released pending trial.
Later on when the court established that the materials they were trying to obtain could in fact be used to produce sarin, a warrant for the arrest was issued.
The case sparked political controversy when the deputy of the Turkish opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) Eren Erdem said in an interview with RT that Turkey knew about ISIL-bound shipments of deadly sarin gas passing through its territory.
Eren Erdem was accused of treason by Ankara’s top prosecutor and criminal investigation was opened against him.
But after addressing the parliament and saying that the Turkish president had started a smear campaign against him, Erdem went even further by accusing the Turkish authorities of complicity, stating that the government pressured the prosecutor of the case into toning down the accusations and ending the trial rapidly.
The prosecutor of the case involving the five Turkish suspects recently denied Erdem’s accusations in a statement, saying the Turkish suspects were released because they were not found to be in possession of the materials used for sarin production, while rejecting the idea that the justice minister pressured him into bringing the case to a close immediately.
Two CHP deputies said that the Turkish government was out to get Eren Erdem and had launched a lynching campaign against the deputy.
Republican People’s Party (CHP) deputy Ali Şeker stated that Turkish authorities must answer questions in connection with the incident.
Losing Ground: 2015 Proved a ‘Lost Year’ for Turkey
Sputnik – 01.01.2016
In an interview with CNBC, Unicredit Bank AG’s Chief Economist for Central and Eastern Europe Lubomir Mitov said that Ankara could derive enormous benefit from the situation in Europe and capitalize on low oil prices, but instead it had lost all its economic advantages, quarreled with all its neighbors, and spoiled ties with Russia.
According to Mitov, 2015 was a “lost year” for Turkey, which missed many opportunities because of the deterioration of the geopolitical situation.
He said that in particular, Turkey could have “benefited tremendously” from the current situation in Europe, where the Central Bank has increased asset purchases to try to keep the economy afloat. Still, those gains were never achieved due to internal political strife and geopolitics, Mitov recalled.
“Turkey is underperforming [and] has been underperforming for the full year…it’s even underperforming after the elections,” he said.
He also pointed out that “Turkey is probably 3 to 4 percent weaker than it should have been after the elections, but for these geopolitical problems.”
Even though the previous government tried to develop friendly relations with its neighboring states, Turkey now has “almost no neighbors left, according to Mitov, who recalled that Ankara earlier sparked rows with Iraq, Egypt and Syria.
The situation is further exacerbated by Turkey’s increased tensions in relations with Russia after Ankara’s downing of the Russian Su-24 bomber. In response, “Moscow clamped down on agricultural imports, set stringent visa limits, and restricted tourism to Turkey,” according to Mitov.
He was echoed by Peter Toogood, an investment director at City Financial Investment Company Limited, who was quoted by CNBS as saying that a lack of structural reforms has stopped Turkey from capitalizing on “the full benefits of economic boons like low oil prices.”
“The lira continues to decline, it has had no meaningful impact … the oil price has come down, [and] it should be the absolute example of a beneficiary, and it hasn’t been,” Toogood said.
Turkey rejects Iraq’s warning against Ankara troop deployment
Press TV – December 31, 2015
Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has dismissed Baghdad’s warning of military action to defend Iraqi sovereignty if Ankara does not pull its troops out of northern Iraq.
“If Baghdad wants to use force, they should use it against Daesh, get rid of Daesh from Mousul. If they do so… why we would risk our army, we would withdraw to our country,” Davutoglu said in an interview with Turkish broadcaster NTV.
He made the remarks in response to Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, who called on Turkey Wednesday to withdraw its troops or risk the use of military action.
Baghdad and Ankara are locked in a war of words over the presence of Turkish troops in northern Iraq.
On December 4, Turkey deployed some 150 soldiers, equipped with heavy weapons and backed by 20 to 25 tanks, to the outskirts of Mosul, the capital of Iraq’s Nineveh Province.
Ankara claimed the deployment was part of a mission to train and equip Iraq’s Kurdish Peshmerga forces in the fight against Daesh.
Baghdad has strongly condemned the presence of the Turkish battalion on the Iraqi territory, branding the uncoordinated act as a violation of Iraq’s national sovereignty.
Elsewhere in his remarks, Davutoglu claimed that Turkish troops were in northern Iraq in a bid to prevent terrorist infiltration into Turkey.
“I wish Iraq can control this area (northern parts) so that we don’t need to launch air operations there to prevent the leak of terrorists into Turkey.”
On Wednesday, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi held a phone conversation with Davutoglu, calling on Ankara to respect the territorial integrity of Iraq and withdraw its troops from the Arab country.
Syria Accuses Turkey of ‘Taking Part in Military Operations’ Backing Daesh
Sputnik – 30.12.2015
Turkish forces directly assisted terrorist groups fighting in Syria, Bashar Jaafari, Syria’s envoy to the UN, wrote in a letter to the UN Secretary General and the Security Council.
Jaafari noted that armed groups have been waging an “unprecedented terrorist war” against Syria since 2011, adding that rebels receive backing from regional powers, including “the Erdogan regime,” and other countries.
Turkey’s engagement in Syria’s domestic affairs, according to Jaafari, has been multifaceted, “including the direct participation of the Erdogan regime’s armed forces in offensive military operations in support of terrorists.”
Ankara, according to the letter, has essentially helped terrorists enter Syria. Turkish troops provided “fire cover” to rebels crossing to the war-torn Arab country.
Bashar Jaafari also noted that the Turkish president wants to “revive the Ottoman colonial legacy” as evidenced by Erdogan’s explicit desire to protect ethnic Turks, even if they live in other countries.
The Syrian envoy accused Ankara of committing crimes against Syrian refugees, who fled Daesh, al-Nusra Front and other terrorist organizations fighting in the Arab country. Human trafficking, according to Jaafari, is conducted “with knowledge and direct participation” of organizations controlled by the Erdogan regime.
Jaafari has called on the international community to put an end to “violations and crimes” committed by the Turkish leadership with regard to Syria and Syrian refugees.
The Syrian envoy to the UN also mentioned the Russian bomber, which was shot out of Syrian skies by a Turkish fighter jet while on a counterterrorism mission. “No additional explanations are needed since this crime speaks for itself,” he noted.
Turkey Backs Anti-Russian Tatar Sabotage and Subversion
By Stephen Lendman | December 29, 2015
Turkish President Erdogan is up to his ears in high crimes, internally and abroad, his rap sheet matching some of the world’s worst.
Self-determination is a universal right. Crimea is legally part of Russia, its population overwhelmingly voting by national referendum in March 2014 (by a 96.77% majority with an 83.1% turnout) to correct a historic mistake.
There’s no going back or legitimate reason for any nation to reject reality. Washington and likeminded regimes remain hardline, including Turkey – Erdogan directly aiding the formation of a Crimean Tatar battalion, tasked with committing sabotage and other forms of subversion. More on this below.
Last August, Erdogan met with anti-Russian Tatar resistance leaders Mustafa Dzhemilev and Refat Chubarov in Ankara – promising no Turkish recognition of Crimea as a Russian province, pledging aid to its subversive resistance.
Recently, he met with Dzhemilev and Chubarov in Konya Turkey, both men organizers of the failed Crimean food and electricity blockade. Discussions about a strategic alliance with Ukraine and possible naval blockade of the peninsula were held – with Turkey’s involvement.
Lenur Islyamov represents the illegitimate, unregistered “Majlis (or council) of Crimean Tatars” organization. He explained Ankara is actively involved in forming a Tatar battalion on the pretext of “protecting the Crimean frontier” – code language for plotting sabotage and subversion, operating as an enemy of Russia with direct Erdogan aid.
According to Islyamov, “(w)hile the Ukrainian defense ministry only scratches its head, (its) Turkish” counterpart is offering direct support – likely including weapons, munitions, funding and training to commit lawless acts against the Russian Federation.
Islyamov told Ukrainian television viewers, “(w)e now have more than a hundred people who have already entered the battalion as volunteers, but we hope that after all the ministry of defense and the armed forces of Ukraine, will create and allow the Crimean Tatars to have their own national battalion within the armed forces.”
He aims to enlist hundreds of fighters, able to wage guerrilla war on the pretext of defending Crimea’s borders, risking direct confrontation with Moscow, apparently part of Erdogan’s dirty scheme complicit with Washington, following his downing a Russian Su-24 bomber, a willful act of war.
Islyamov promised further efforts to isolate Crimea and ways to “liberate Tatars” within a year – returning the peninsula to Ukraine – a strategy of madness, making no more sense than attempting to liberate my home state of Illinois from America.
His notion of instituting a naval blockade with Turkish help, including “small boats (able) to attack ships carry(ing) goods to Crimea” has no chance to succeed.
In late November, Tatar insurgents destroyed parts of the southern Ukraine Kherson region electricity grid, supplying energy to Crimea – preventing repair crews from restoring power, leaving 1.8 million people in the dark for days.
Russia intervened responsibly, supplying energy amounts needed – the first stage of a so-called energy bridge weeks ahead of schedule.
Most Crimeans are ethnic Russians, Tatars at most about 12% of the population, their people not in conflict with other ethnic groups, a small rogue band entirely responsible.
Erdogan risks greater confrontation with Russia than already – by partnering in sabotage and subversion, more proof of his rogue credentials.
Legitimate Majlis Tatar officials reject Dzhemilev, Chubarov, Islyamov and other hardliners, saying “cooperation with extremist groups condemned by the whole progressive world has deprived them of their right to represent Crimean Tatars.”
“From now on, all their statements at any forums should be qualified as personal opinions” – not representing the views of the vast majority of Crimean Tatars.
They denounced rogue elements using Tatar national symbols, saying they’re “not a bargaining chip for political crooks. No one gave them the right to unilaterally use our relics at their discretion.”
Erdogan continues overstepping recklessly, already deeply involved in supporting ISIS, challenging Russia’s patience, perhaps sowing seeds of internal rebellion.
Stephen Lendman can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
What’s Behind Turkey’s Repeated Calls for No-Fly Zone in Syria?
Sputnik – 29.12.2015
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan’s calls for a safe zone in Syria are aimed at destabilizing the situation in the region, including the collapse of Syria, analysts said.
On December 27, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced plans to create a safe zone in Syria. In an interview with Al Arabiya he said that the safe zone could shelter refugees who live in Turkey and want to return to Syria.
The zone is initially planned to stretch 98 km along the border and span 45 km in the territory of Syria, with the possibility of further expansion, Erdogan explained. According to the president, the area will be “terrorism-free”.
He also suggested that the Turkish government could begin raising funds for the project, including building houses for refuges.
Thus, Erdogan continues to hold unofficial discussions with Washington. In early December, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said that projects such as a safe zone in Syria would require significant resources.
Ground forces would be necessary to protect a safe zone. But this contradicts the strategy proposed by President Barack Obama, Earnest underscored.
Meanwhile, in August, the Turkish Foreign Ministry announced that Washington had given the green light to establish a safe zone in Syria which would be protected jointly by US and Turkish troops.
In turn, Washington denounced the statement saying that the sides had agreed only on using the Turkish Incirlik airbase by US forces. It seems that the US and Turkey discussed a safe zone but in the end Washington evaded any final agreements.
Now, Erdogan has again brought up the initiative. And this time it is very likely that Turkey will act. The situation is changing in Syria where government forces have significantly advanced against terrorists. The country may be divided into “occupation zones”, so it is very important for Ankara to play one of the key roles in the process.
“Now, Erdogan needs major achievements in his foreign policy,” Alexei Fenenko, a security expert at the Russian Academy of Sciences, told Svobodnaya Pressa. “The last two months were difficult for the Turkish president. The row between Ankara and Moscow caused a crisis in tourism and in the Turkish garment industry. His attempt to invade Iraq failed. Finally, Turkey now has tensions with Greece.”
All of the above has prompted Erdogan to take decisive steps to establish a safe zone in Syria, the analyst noted.
“I’m afraid this may be the scenario. There is no one more fearless than a politician who has nothing to lose. After a series of failures a politician like Erdogan can hit badly,” Fenenko said.
Turkey is very likely to attempt to occupy part of Syria to establish a safe zone, he pointed out. At the same, the US’ actions would depend on what Ankara achieves.
At the same time, Russia will oppose such a scenario since it is committed to protecting Syria’s territorial integrity, Fesenko said.
“I believe we should once again reaffirm our readiness to protect its territorial integrity. Russia may rely on its S-400 air defense systems deployed to the Hmeymim airbase. This means there is still the possibility of a military confrontation between Russia and Turkey,” he concluded.
Erdogan has made numerous statements about his readiness to establish a safe zone in Syria, analyst Stanislav Tarasov said.
Ankara’s policy in the region is still based on the scenario which presumes the collapse of Syria and Iraq, he pointed out. But the balance has changed, and other players will not let Turkey establish a safe zone in Syria.
“Turkey will not invade Syria. There are Syrian forces backed by Russian jets. What is more, if Turkey invaded the Kurds may support Damascus,” Tarasov said. “The problem is that Ankara still relies on Syria’s collapse and is not ready for any other outcome. This is why Ankara’s calls for a safe zone in Syria are wrong.”
German Leftists to Protest Sending AWACs to Turkey Without Parliamentary Approval
By Alexander Mosesov | Sputnik | 28.12.2015
Germany’s Left Party (Die Linke) will officially protest the government’s decision to send Boeing E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning & Control System (AWACS) aircraft to Turkey without a parliamentary approval, member of the German parliament’s defense committee told Sputnik on Monday.
On Sunday, media reported that NATO would place the Boeing E-3 Sentry aircraft as part of its air defense package to Turkey amid the Syrian crisis. The deployment will be carried out by the country’s armed forces. The German government says the deployment only has to do with surveillance operations and the parliament will not be consulted on the issue.
“The Left party will officially protest against this decision of sending troops without consulting the parliament,” Alexander Neu said.
Neu also added that the country’s political elite “is eager to make Germany a big player [in the Middle East] by military means.”
Earlier in the day, German lawmakers criticized the government for the decision, saying that Bundestag should be immediately informed of the details.
On December 18, NATO agreed to provide Ankara with an air defense package that will include AWACS surveillance planes, enhanced air policing, and increased naval presence amid the ongoing conflict in Syria.
Syria has been mired in civil war since 2011, with opposition factions and Islamist terrorist groups fighting the Syrian Army.
Syria: Has Anyone Stepped Back from the Brink?
By Michael Jabara CARLEY | Strategic Culture Foundation | 26.12.2015
John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, recently visited Moscow to discuss the Syrian crisis with his colleague Sergei Lavrov and President Vladimir Putin. Journalists observed handshakes, smiles, even hearty laughter, between Kerry and his Russian counterparts. Syrian President Bashar al Assad does not have to resign immediately, Kerry declared, and the United States is not trying to isolate Russia. What good news, and what a surprise for the Russians. The Moscow show seemed a great success. Kerry strolled along Stariy Arbat Street, met smiling Russian pedestrians and bought souvenirs to take home. A few days later the UN Security Council passed a resolution, calling for a ceasefire and negotiations. Russian and western journalists alike now say there is some hope to avoid the worst in Syria. And as you may already know, if the United States wants a ceasefire, it’s because their «moderate» Jihadist allies are getting beaten up now by the Syrian Arab Army backed by Russian air support.
Is cautious optimism warranted about a Syrian peace? It is hard to see how. Kerry may say whatever he wants in Moscow, but when he gets back to Washington, he sings a different song, or his colleagues do. His boss, President Obama, said «Assad has to go» only a few days after Kerry returned home. And then there is the new phantasmagorical story published by Seymour B Hersh, the muckraking US journalist, who has revealed that not everyone inside the US government is brain dead. It’s a remarkable discovery when you think about US foreign policy. Some military officials, and no less than the former Chief of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, were actually indirectly, and very secretly, passing military intelligence to the Syrian government to help it fight Daesh, Al-Qaeda and allied Jihadist forces operating in Syria. At the same time, the CIA, with Obama’s support, was sending arms hither and thither in Syria to help the Jihadists overthrow the Assad government.
General Dempsey left office in September 2015 and was replaced by General Joseph Dunford, a true blue Russophobe, who says Russia is an «existential threat» to the United States. It is a classic Washington response: the US aggressor accuses its intended victim of aggression. Just the other day (22 December), the United States slapped on gratuitous new sanctions against Russia. It’s the same old pretext: Russian «aggression» in the Ukraine.
Yet another US provocation, you might think, as Russia searches for a peaceful settlement of the Syrian war. The Russian government is taking a sensible position, but in the present circumstances, is a negotiated peace a real possibility? If the war in Syria were simply a civil war, as is often repeated in the media, you could encourage the belligerents to put on suits and ties and sit down at a table to negotiate a settlement. Unfortunately, the war in Syria is not a civil war: it is rather a proxy war of aggression led by the United States, Britain, and France (until the Paris massacre in November), and pursued vigorously in the region by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, and Apartheid Israel.
Turkey is playing a dirty, evil role. It provides arms and supplies across its borders for Daesh in Syria. Oil taken from Syrian wells by Daesh travels in the opposite direction, sold at cut rate prices, to provide revenue to the Jihadists for their war against Assad. It is estimated that Daesh was obtaining $40 millions a month from exported oil (before Russian intervention), but this is a bagatelle in terms of the money necessary for the Jihadists to wage war against Syria. Hundreds of millions are required. Saudi Arabia and Qatar are important suppliers and financiers of the Salafi Jihadist movement. Jordan permits training of Jihadists on its territory and allows passage across its frontiers into Syria. Israel also provides support from the occupied Golan territory, even providing medical care to wounded Jihadists. A coalition of states, four of which are NATO members, is waging a war of aggression against Syria. Against this array of deadly enemies, the Syrian government and the Syrian Arab Army, in a remarkable feat of arms, has been able to hold out for more than four years. President Assad has proven his courage and tenacity as a leader by refusing US summons to resign and by staying in Damascus to share the personal danger which all Syrians must endure simply to live in their country. No wonder Obama wants to get rid of Assad before talk about Syrian elections for he would almost certainly win them.
Sputnik in Moscow has estimated that there are as many as 70,000 foreign Jihadists fighting in Syria.

These forces appear for the most part are well motivated, supplied largely with US weapons and deeply entrenched in various parts of Syria. Since the Russian intervention on the side of the Syrian government, progress has been made in rooting out Jihadist forces, but as long as supply routes remain open across Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, even Lebanon, the war in Syria is not going to end.
Turkey’s role is particularly dangerous. It is a NATO member and it uses this privileged position to commit acts of aggression against Iraq and Syria. It shot down a Russian warplane in a well-planned ambush, likely with US connivance, and then ran to hide in NATO’s skirts. Apparently, the Turkish government hoped to sabotage budding European cooperation with Russia against Daesh, or to provoke a NATO-Russian war, as insane as that might seem. Other NATO members, the United States, France, and Britain, have also been deeply involved in the proxy war against Syria. Indeed, after the destruction of Libya, it has been reported that NATO planes were secretly used to transport Jihadists and Libyan arms to other Middle Eastern fronts. NATO members are effectively allied with Daesh and its Al-Qaeda derivatives against the Syrian government.
To be sure, the United States and its European vassals have attempted to cover up their links to the Jihadist war in Syria by launching make-believe air attacks on Daesh targets, occasionally bombing a caterpillar tractor here or there and blowing up a lot of sand in people’s eyes. Russian intervention exposed the double game of the United States and changed the balance of military forces in Syria.
Even now however, the US air force sends warning messages to Jihadist truck drivers to get away from their vehicles before it attacks them. Or it refuses altogether to attack trucks carrying Daesh oil, claiming it’s private civilian property. How preposterous! Since World War II, when has the United States hesitated to attack civilian targets? It is understandable that Obama and the CIA, having been caught red-handed in Syria, are furious with Putin for exposing them. Nevertheless, the Russian government has offered the United States, a porte de sortie, pushing for an anti-Jihadist alliance and peace talks to settle the war.
Peace is a marvelous idea and the US escape route, a practical gesture, but how is Foreign Minister Lavrov going to get Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, Jordan, and Israel, not to mention the United States and Britain, to stop supporting the Jihadist movement in Syria and Iraq? Talk about an impossible alliance: it’s like taking a writhing nest of asps to your breast and hoping they won’t bite you. Are such hopes realistic? «Maybe not but that’s diplomacy,» Lavrov might respond: «we have to try nevertheless». These days it takes infinite patience and great theatrical skills to be a Russian diplomat. Russia is trying to finesse the United States into dropping its support of «moderate» Jihadists. In fact, such moderates do not exist.

Neither does the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA). The Jihadists decapitate a few hapless victims, and FSA volunteers run away in horror leaving their arms for Daesh. Or, they laugh at the infidels’ stupidity and go over, arms in hand, to the Jihadist side.
Even if Russia could get real commitments from the United States, which is as yet quite uncertain, what is to be done about Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states? And what is to be done with all the foreign Jihadists in Syria? Are these terrorists and war criminals going to be encouraged to return to the 40+ different countries whence they came to stir up violence there? And what is to be done about the Syrian Jihadists, though there is no open source information about their numbers? Will they be allowed to remain at large, or worse, will they be recognised as a legitimate Syrian opposition?
Even an anti-Jihadist coalition of willing members will have hard work rooting out Daesh and its allies. But the coalition of asps which Russia is trying to organise is composed of Daesh supporters. How is that going to work? One fears not at all well since the would-be alliance members, with the possible exception of France, have not abandoned their backing of Daesh, whatever one hears to the contrary notwithstanding. The United States remains the chief culprit continuing to pursue its two-faced, dangerous policies.

«The four core elements of Obama’s Syria policy remain intact today», Seymour Hersh says: «an insistence that Assad must go; that no anti-IS (Islamic State) coalition with Russia is possible; that Turkey is a steadfast ally in the war against terrorism; and that there really are significant moderate opposition forces for the US to support».
Policy based on false premises invariably leads to failure. Obama’s policy is no exception. Assad is a courageous leader of Syrian resistance against the Jihadist invasion. The only possible successful coalition against Daesh, Al-Qaeda and their affiliates is with Assad and with Russia. Turkey is a dangerous provocateur, playing with matches amongst open kegs of gunpowder, trying to drag NATO into a deeper de facto alliance with Daesh or even war with Russia. Finally, there are no «moderate» Jihadist forces in Syria. The Free Syrian Army barely exists at all, and the so-called moderates are no less murderous than their Daesh allies.
One cannot fault the Russians for trying to organise an anti-Jihadist alliance in Syria, but their potential allies, apart perhaps from the apparently repentant French, are all snakes in the grass. And Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, is the biggest snake of all. «Do you realise what you have done?» Putin asked at the UN in September. Not yet apparently, reports to the contrary notwithstanding. But then, as we know, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

