America's Plan B, and the Houthi fly in the ointment

by Mindfriedo

 

From the start of the conflict in Syria, one thing has been conspicuously absent: Balance, tit for tat, and eye for an eye. Hafiz Al Assad understood these concepts well. He kept his friends close and his enemies closer. The Israelis and the great powers understand balance, at least when dealing with equals. Bashar was overtly loyal to Iran and the resistance, he should have seen things coming. His father would have. The Saudi's failed bid to woo Syria was the harbinger to Syria's ills. 

 

Bashar also did the one thing his father never did. He opened his doors to Turkey. Two states that have always harmed Syria, and every Syrian will tell you this, are Egypt and Turkey. With friends like these who needs Israel. 

 

The resistance has been fighting defensive. Slowly and self assuredly the empire, and it's  bully in the region, Israel, along with the other big crime families: Saudi, Qatar and Kuwait have been escalating the conflict against the resistance with impunity. The current advance of the Shia Houthis in Yemen, is a late yet visible response to the Empire's Daash (ISIS) project in Syria and Iraq. It has now forced the Saudis to talk to the "snake" Iran. Saudi Arabia may soon need its "moderate" 5000 strong Sunni army in the east rather than in far away Syria.

 

The steadfastness that the "spear tip" of Iran (Hezbollah) has shown has frustrated Israel at every turn. Israel has vented its frustration by hitting Gaza hard and by proving to the world that "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me." It has also baited Hezbollah by pressing hard on Gaza. But has realised that the next war it fights will involve an invasion of Israel. 

 

But the Shia resistance, aided by Sunni fighters of Assad, and backed by Russia, has frustrated the Americans even more. One thing that now seems very clear is that what the US wanted, more than anything, was boots on the ground in Iraq. The  Shia political leadership in Iraq could be bought---as was the military leadership on the eve of Iraq's collapse---but not the older, deeper, and wise Hauza. Sistani's insistent opposition to any extension of US occupation, Sadr and Iran aiming for the same, made sure that the US could not stay. Maliki became immaterial to the US after that. 

 

Another approach was needed, and in came Daash. Like a disease incubated, the leadership of Daash coalesced while under US "detention." The United States provided humane living quarters for psychopaths and degenerates that should otherwise have been killed. Sistani's call to arms prevented Baghdad from falling, an eventuality that would have had Obama come to the rescue. 

 

Turkey is brazenly and self assuredly playing with fire. The Kurds in Syria are now fleeing to Turkey. Turkey that is inhuman enough to at first close its borders. Turkey that is making money off blood oil. Turkey that has had its hostages released. Turkey that wants a greater role and is unwilling to fight Daash. Turkey that is the strategic depth of Daash to the north. Turkey that is headed for disaster. For there is bound to be some move like the Houthi one against Saudi. Without balance the picture skews to one side. And that is naturally unacceptable. There is enough of an Allawi population in Turkey to start something as is the huge Kurdish refugee population. When and how the resistance pulls this off is going to be very interesting and heart warming. Like Ariel Sharon, Erdogan, a winner so far, is going to be loathed once he starts to loose (he is already loathed by half of Turkey's population).

 

In Iraq, everything is now pretence but transparent. The mask has now come off. The United States did not gets its reward(oil) for bringing "democracy" to Iraq. The oil is flowing in the wrong direction, and no body is paying the bill. So Iraq has to pay in lives. At a recent Sadr rally in the south of Baghdad, (http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/suspicions-run-deep-in-iraq-that-cia-and-the-islamic-state-are-united-595462?pfrom=home-lateststories) Shias and Sunnis said the same thing: Daash is CIA. The air strikes are placebos. The Great Satan is up to no good. 

 

The game, Empire against the Resistance, is on. 

 

PS: SITREPs will begin tomorrow, but will be twice a week

Excellent further reading: www.spectator.co.uk/life/high-life/9315562/what-is-to-be-done-about-a-world-where-everything-is-for-sale/

 

Two interesting stories from Syria's Ba'athist past:

Ali Duba was Hafez Al Assad's head of intelligence. So renowned/feared was he that when the uprising/project against Bashar started, Bashar is rumoured to have said to his people to get in line or he would bring back Ali Duba.

The first story is when Duba's son was kidnapped. The intelligence apparatus of the Syrian state was fast enough to locate the kidnappers in a village on the Syrian Lebanese border before the boy could be carried over. Duba surrounded the village with tanks and made the villagers an offer they could not refuse. He said either my son walks out, or nobody does. His son walked out.

 

The second was when Hafiz was visiting his home town. A neighbour of his, an old Allawite lady approached him and said that her conscripted son was posted far away from home. And that he as President could perhaps do something and bring him closer to home. When Hafiz remonstrated that his own sons were serving far away, she asked him not to worry, it was ok, she would ask Ali Duba.

 

In tomorrow's SITREP: the downfall of Ali Duba

To know very little about the man: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Duba

Russia should take ‘serious measures’ if US decides to strike Syria - Duma

RT reports:

The head of the Duma Foreign Affairs Committee says Russia should reconsider its cooperation with coalition forces in Afghanistan and provide Iran with defensive weapons if US authorities go ahead with their plan of military interference in Syria.

“The US administration is ready, albeit with numerous stipulations, to study the Russian proposal of transferring the Syrian chemical weapons potential under international control. If these diplomatic efforts yield results, this could become a way out of the pre-war situation that Syria and the whole world find themselves in right now,” Aleksey Pushkov told the State Duma on Wednesday.

MP Leonid Kalashnikov suggested that if the US starts the military operation in Syria, Russia should supply defensive weapons to Iran. Pushkov fully supported that idea.

“If the ‘party of war’ eventually prevails in the United States and the efforts of Syria’s enemies that are quite numerous would yield results, I think it would be absolutely justified to consider more serious measures on the Russian side, including the broadening of defensive weaponry supplies to Iran and considering changing the mode of our cooperation with the USA on Afghanistan, in particular, the transit conditions,” Pushkov noted.

He again emphasized that such measures would be justified if the United States chooses to abandon diplomacy and go for the military scenario.

MP Vladimir Simagin addressed Pushkov, noting that the current situation was very much like the one in 1933, when the Nazis set fire to the Reichstag and put the blame on others.

“Is there a danger that some third countries like Lebanon, Israel and Iran would be dragged into the conflict?” Simagin asked.

Pushkov replied that the military scenario in Syria would automatically mean the involvement of Lebanon and quite possibly also the involvement of Iran. In addition, such events could lead to more intense religious and ethnic conflicts in Iraq.

He added that the danger of such a development surely existed.

Moreover, according to Pushkov, there were reports saying that the Syrian opposition forces were preparing a chemical attack on Israel that they would afterwards blame on pro-Assad forces.

Many countries are interested in frustrating the Russian plan of relinquishing Syria’s chemical weapons to international control, Pushkov told the chamber, adding that many different forces were inventing new provocations and the aggravation of the situation could be expected.

After Pushkov’s speech, State Duma Speaker Sergey Naryshkin suggested a parliamentary statement on the aggravation of the situation in Syria be considered.

The current draft statement includes another call for diplomatic settlement of the conflict, the further investigation of the incident of chemical weapons use in this country and scheduling the Geneva-2 international conference to discuss a peaceful way out of the crisis.

Joint Press Conference of Sergei Lavrov and Walid Muallem

Sorry - only in Russian and Arabic. If/when I get the transcript, I will post it here. 

Syrian sequel (Pepe Escobar vs. Stephen Schlesinger)

Pepe Escobar - brilliant as always!

A credible report about what happened at the recent meetings between Russian officials and Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan

First, here is the report as published by Information Clearing House translating As-Safir.  I have just bolded out the particularly important parts.  This is the text in-extenso:
-------
A diplomatic report about the “stormy meeting” in July between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan concluded that the region stretching from North Africa to Chechnya and from Iran to Syria — in other words, the entire Middle East — has come under the influence of an open US-Russian face-off and that “it is not unlikely that things [will] take a dramatic turn in Lebanon, in both the political and security senses, in light of the major Saudi decision to respond to Hezbollah’s involvement in the Syrian crisis.”

The report starts by presenting the conditions under which the Russian-Saudi meeting was convened. It states that Prince Bandar, in coordination with the Americans and some European partners, proposed to Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz that Bandar visit Moscow and employ the carrot-and-stick approach, which is used in most negotiators, and offer the Russian leadership political, economic, military and security enticements in return for concessions on several regional issues, in particular Syria and Iran.

King Abdullah agreed with the proposal and contacted President Putin on July 30. In a conversation that lasted only a few minutes, they agreed to Bandar’s visit and to keep it under wraps. Bandar arrived in Moscow. The visit was secret. The Saudi Embassy did not follow the usual protocol for Saudi officials visiting Russia.

In Moscow, a preliminary session was held at Russian military intelligence headquarters between Bandar and the director of Russian Military Intelligence, Gen. Igor Sergon. The meeting focused on security cooperation between the two countries. Bandar then visited Putin’s house on the outskirts of the Russian capital, where they held a closed-door bilateral meeting that lasted four hours. They discussed the agenda, which consisted of bilateral issues and a number of regional and international matters in which the two countries share interest.

Bilateral relations

At the bilateral level, Bandar relayed the Saudi king’s greetings to Putin and the king’s emphasis on the importance of developing the bilateral relationship. He also told Putin that the king would bless any understanding reached during the visit. Bandar also said, however, that “any understanding we reach in this meeting will not only be a Saudi-Russian understanding, but will also be an American-Russian understanding. I have spoken with the Americans before the visit, and they pledged to commit to any understandings that we may reach, especially if we agree on the approach to the Syrian issue.”

Bandar stressed the importance of developing relations between the two countries, saying that the logic of interests can reveal large areas of cooperation. He gave several examples in the economic, investment, oil and military arenas.

Bandar told Putin, “There are many common values ​​and goals that bring us together, most notably the fight against terrorism and extremism all over the world. Russia, the US, the EU and the Saudis agree on promoting and consolidating international peace and security. The terrorist threat is growing in light of the phenomena spawned by the Arab Spring. We have lost some regimes. And what we got in return were terrorist experiences, as evidenced by the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the extremist groups in Libya. ... As an example, I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics in the city of Sochi on the Black Sea next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us, and they will not move in the Syrian territory’s direction without coordinating with us. These groups do not scare us. We use them in the face of the Syrian regime but they will have no role or influence in Syria’s political future.”

Putin thanked King Abdullah for his greetings and Bandar for his exposition, but then he said to Bandar, “We know that you have supported the Chechen terrorist groups for a decade. And that support, which you have frankly talked about just now, is completely incompatible with the common objectives of fighting global terrorism that you mentioned. We are interested in developing friendly relations according to clear and strong principles.”

Bandar said that the matter is not limited to the kingdom and that some countries have overstepped the roles drawn for them, such as Qatar and Turkey. He added, “We said so directly to the Qataris and to the Turks. We rejected their unlimited support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. The Turks’ role today has become similar to Pakistan’s role in the Afghan war. We do not favor extremist religious regimes, and we wish to establish moderate regimes in the region. It is worthwhile to pay attention to and to follow up on Egypt’s experience. We will continue to support the [Egyptian] army, and we will support Defense Minister Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi because he is keen on having good relations with us and with you. And we suggest to you to be in contact with him, to support him and to give all the conditions for the success of this experiment. We are ready to hold arms deals with you in exchange for supporting these regimes, especially Egypt.”

Economic and oil cooperation

Then Bandar discussed the potential cooperation between the two countries if an understanding could be reached on a number of issues, especially Syria. He discussed at length the matter of oil and investment cooperation, saying, “Let us examine how to put together a unified Russian-Saudi strategy on the subject of oil. The aim is to agree on the price of oil and production quantities that keep the price stable in global oil markets. ... We understand Russia’s great interest in the oil and gas present in the Mediterranean Sea from Israel to Cyprus through Lebanon and Syria. And we understand the importance of the Russian gas pipeline to Europe. We are not interested in competing with that. We can cooperate in this area as well as in the areas of establishing refineries and petrochemical industries. The kingdom can provide large multi-billion-dollar investments in various fields in the Russian market. What’s important is to conclude political understandings on a number of issues, particularly Syria and Iran.”

Putin responded that the proposals about oil and gas, economic and investment cooperation deserve to be studied by the relevant ministries in both countries.

Syria first

Bandar discussed the Syrian issue at length. He explained how the kingdom’s position had evolved on the Syrian crisis since the Daraa incident all the way to what is happening today. He said, “The Syrian regime is finished as far as we and the majority of the Syrian people are concerned. [The Syrian people] will not allow President Bashar al-Assad to remain at the helm. The key to the relations between our two countries starts by understanding our approach to the Syrian issue. So you have to stop giving [the Syrian regime] political support, especially at the UN Security Council, as well as military and economic support. And we guarantee you that Russia’s interests in Syria and on the Mediterranean coast will not be affected one bit. In the future, Syria will be ruled by a moderate and democratic regime that will be directly sponsored by us and that will have an interest in understanding Russia's interests and role in the region.”

Russia’s intransigence is to Iran’s benefit

Bandar also presented Saudi Arabia’s views about Iran’s role in the region, especially in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, Bahrain and other countries. He said he hoped that the Russians would understand that Russia's interests and the interests of the Gulf states are one in the face of Iranian greed and nuclear challenge.

Putin gave his country’s position on the Arab Spring developments, especially about what has happened in Libya, saying, “We are very concerned about Egypt. And we understand what the Egyptian army is doing. But we are very cautious in approaching what’s happening because we are afraid that things may slide toward an Egyptian civil war, which would be too costly for the Egyptians, the Arabs and the international community. I wanted to do a brief visit to Egypt. And the matter is still under discussion.”

Regarding Iran, Putin said to Bandar that Iran is a neighbor, that Russia and Iran are bound by relations that go back centuries, and that there are common and tangled interests between them. Putin said, “We support the Iranian quest to obtain nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And we helped them develop their facilities in this direction. Of course, we will resume negotiations with them as part of the 5P+1 group. I will meet with President Hassan Rouhani on the sidelines of the Central Asia summit and we will discuss a lot of bilateral, regional and international issues. We will inform him that Russia is completely opposed to the UN Security Council imposing new sanctions on Iran. We believe that the sanctions imposed against Iran and Iranians are unfair and that we will not repeat the experience again.”

Erdogan to visit Moscow in September

Regarding the Turkish issue, Putin spoke of his friendship with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan; “Turkey is also a neighboring country with which we have common interests. We are keen to develop our relations in various fields. During the Russian-Turkish meeting, we scrutinized the issues on which we agree and disagree. We found out that we have more converging than diverging views. I have already informed the Turks, and I will reiterate my stance before my friend Erdogan, that what is happening in Syria necessitates a different approach on their part. Turkey will not be immune to Syria’s bloodbath. The Turks ought to be more eager to find a political settlement to the Syrian crisis. We are certain that the political settlement in Syria is inevitable, and therefore they ought to reduce the extent of damage. Our disagreement with them on the Syrian issue does not undermine other understandings between us at the level of economic and investment cooperation. We have recently informed them that we are ready to cooperate with them to build two nuclear reactors. This issue will be on the agenda of the Turkish prime minister during his visit to Moscow in September.”

Putin: Our stance on Assad will not change

Regarding the Syrian issue, the Russian president responded to Bandar, saying, “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters. During the Geneva I Conference, we agreed with the Americans on a package of understandings, and they agreed that the Syrian regime will be part of any settlement. Later on, they decided to renege on Geneva I. In all meetings of Russian and American experts, we reiterated our position. In his upcoming meeting with his American counterpart John Kerry, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will stress the importance of making every possible effort to rapidly reach a political settlement to the Syrian crisis so as to prevent further bloodshed.”

As soon as Putin finished his speech, Prince Bandar warned that in light of the course of the talks, things were likely to intensify, especially in the Syrian arena, although he appreciated the Russians’ understanding of Saudi Arabia’s position on Egypt and their readiness to support the Egyptian army despite their fears for Egypt's future.

The head of the Saudi intelligence services said that the dispute over the approach to the Syrian issue leads to the conclusion that “there is no escape from the military option, because it is the only currently available choice given that the political settlement ended in stalemate. We believe that the Geneva II Conference will be very difficult in light of this raging situation.”

At the end of the meeting, the Russian and Saudi sides agreed to continue talks, provided that the current meeting remained under wraps. This was before one of the two sides leaked it via the Russian press.
-------
Commentary:

OK, this time I hope that what I call the "Russia-skeptics"  will read this very carefully and finally admit to themselves that Russia under Putin is not Russia under Medvedev, much less so Russia under Eltsin or the old Soviet Union.  To the "Russia-skeptics: I want say this:

Guys, I do really understand that the present and the future have to be judged based on the experience provided to us by the past, but only as long as lesson from the past are clearly applicable.  In a fundamentally new situation focusing solely on lessons from the past can lead you to overlook crucial changes and developments.

While I have no idea how/where As-Safir got this report, I will say that judging by its contents this is the real thing, or something very close to it.  Besides, all this report does is put in words what we have seen Putin do ever since he came back to power.  So while the source is impossible to rate, this report is fully consistent with all the other information sources I have.  And the key element here is this: Putin and the "Eurasian Sovereignists" are *not* interested integrating Russia into the Anglo-lead unipolar international system.  This is why all the 'carrots' offered by Bandar do not tempt them.  It is absolutely crucial that anybody wanting to understand what the Kremlin does be fully aware of that.  Yes, Eltsin was 100% a US puppet.  And Medvedev was "sort of a 60/40% pro-US" too.  With Putin we are dealing with a solid, firm and highly principled 100% anti "US New World Order" leader.  What Putin - and China's Xi Jinping - want is a multi-polar international order under the rule of law and without any central hegemon.  This is why Russia (and China) will not, repeat, not yield on Assad.  This is not about Syria any more, its not even about Syria as a first step towards Iran and Iran as a first step towards the Caucasus.  It's about a much bigger picture in which both Russia and China have concluded that the current international order is an existential threat to both of these countries and that it is therefore absolutely and categorically not acceptable.

Then, of course, on a operational level it is also about Syria as a first step to Iran and Iran as a first step to Russia.  And, on a tactical level, it also about Syria itself, seen as an ally of Russia which Russia cannot simply dump.  But on a macro - or strategic level - is about the right (or not) of a single power like the USA to intervene wherever the hell it wants and remove any regime it does not like.

However, there is one thing which Russia will not do to support Syria and that is go to war for it.  Frankly, Syria is not worth a war between the USA and Russia.  Russia will only go to war if it is directly threatened or attacked.  The choice is much harder for Iran which fully understands and shares Russia's and China's desire for a different international order, but for which the outcome of the war in Syria has a much more immediate importance.  Not only has Hezbollah clearly and unambiguously indicated that it will never allow Assad to be replaced by Wahabi liver-eaters, but one could make a good case that since a Assad defeat would signal an inevitable war on Iran, the Iranians might want to defend the Syrians and not let the US take them one by one.  My personal feeling is that Iran would be willing to intervene in Syria if the US/NATO aggression becomes strategically meaningful.  Should that happen I am certain that Russia will put all its capabilities short of an overt military intervention to come to the aid of Iran.

The Syria->Hezbollah->Iran->Russia de-facto alliance is a very interesting one.  It is an alliance of relatively weak countries against one hyper-power, but one which makes the progress along this axis harder and harder as you go along, thereby deterring any action against the weaker one.  This is a very sophisticated defense posture and it has, so far, been very effective.  The problem is that the US foreign policy is quite literally hijacked by absolutely crazy folks, intoxicated by delusions of power and who just cannot walk away from a struggle they cannot win in the long term.  Sadly, this probably means that the resilience of this alliance will be tested.  My personal prediction is that it will hold.  I am frankly not all that confident about Assad himself, though he has done far better than I expected, but I have a great deal of confidence in Hassan Nasrallah, Ali Khamenei and Vladimir Putin.  I also expect Xi Jinping to deliver if things get ugly.

While very bad events are probably imminent, I hope that all of you will maintain some degree of hope for the mid to long term.  Simply put: the Resistance has never been stronger than now, and we can count on some truly exceptional leaders to do the right thing.

The Saker