من حلب إلى درعا… قريباً إدلب

من حلب إلى درعا… قريباً إدلب

يونيو 23, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– تستطيع إدارة الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب أن تزعم الفضل لها بتأجيل مفاعيل انتصار الجيش السوري وحلفائه في حلب، ونجاحها بتجميد مفاعيل مسار أستانة لستة شهور وجعله خلالها إطاراً مرتبكاً يخضع للتجربة والاختبار بانتظار ما سيحدث على جبهة الأوهام باسترداد الجماعات المسلحة زمام المبادرة. وهو ما كان ليحدث لولا التشويش الذي أدخلته عنتريات الرئيس الأميركي ورسائله النارية، التي تكشّف مضمونها عن ألعاب تكتيكية لا عن خيار استراتيجي، حيث يصير الجواب الأميركي عن سؤال حول ما بعد انكسار داعش وفرضية تعرّض القوات الكردية لهجوم من الجيش السوري وهل ستدافع عنها القوات الأميركية، بالقول بالتأكيد لن نفعل ذلك.

– كلّ الذين قتلوا وأصيبوا وكلّ الخراب الذي وقع، خلال فترة ما بعد معارك حلب، نتاج لهذه الأوهام التي زرعتها إدارة الرئيس دونالد ترامب، ودفعت حتى الأتراك الذين ذاقوا مرارة هزيمتهم في حلب إلى التوهّم بأنّ زمناً جديداً يبدأ، وأنّ العودة لرهانات الخيار العسكري في سورية ممكنة، حتى انقضت كلّ اختبارات القوة، وثبت أنّ المعادلة التي أنتجت نصر حلب هي المعادلة الاستراتيجية الثابتة، وأنّ التشويش عليها سياسياً وعسكرياً ليس إلا أفعالاً تكتيكية يريدها الأميركي لقطاف من الأغبياء الذين يقعون ضحايا وهمِ قوّته. كما قالت قمم ترامب في الرياض وحصاده بمئات مليارات الدولارات.

– جاءت معارك درعا، وجاء كلام الرئيس الفرنسي إيمانويل ماكرون كصفعات موجعة للجماعات المسلحة التي وقعت ضحية الوهم، لإعادتها إلى رشدها الحلبي، والتيقن من أنّ شيئاً لم ولن يتغيّر، وأنّ العناد والمكابرة لن ينتجا سوى رفع الأكلاف للتسليم بنتائج يمكن التسليم بها بخسائر أقلّ. ومعلوم أنّ ميزان الردع بعد سلسلة معارك يصير مكثفاً، فلا حاجة لمرور الحرب بكلّ مراحل المرة الأولى لتظهر نتائج مراحلها الأخيرة في المرة التالية. وتكفي مؤشرات التذكير بالموازين لفرض المسار الذي رسم من قبل على حالات أشدّ قوة ومتانة، في حالات أشدّ ضعفاً وهشاشة، وما كانت تبغيه الخطة الأميركية هو تعطيل موقت لفعل هذه القاعدة لتعيد الجماعات المسلحة ورعاتها الإقليميين المرور بالنكسات ذاتها وبأكلاف مضاعفة، حتى تتحقق من أنّ شيئاً لم يتغيّر، لكن كسب الوقت يكون نزيفاً قاتلاً لها، ومكاسب في الجيب الأميركي، تتحقق في الخليج وليس في سورية.

– درعا تدخل اليوم الزمن الحلبي، وتتدحرج مكونات تسوية تشبه تلك التي انتهت بها حرب حلب، ومن درعا إلى حلب، شمال وجنوب سورية وشمال وجنوب الحرب السورية وبوابات العبور منها وإليها، من هاتين البوابتين عبرت الحرب إلى سورية ومنهما تعبر سورية للخروج من الحرب. وبرفع العلم السوري فوق خط الحدود الأردنية ولاحقاً التركية تسدل الستارة على الفصول الأشدّ بشاعة وخطراً في هذه الحرب. وبعد درعا ستكون إدلب قريباً، وبعدهما لن يطول زمن عودة دير الزور، فتلك هي معادلة حسم أمرها، بين حلفين حلف يزداد تماسكاً وحلف يزداد تفتتاً. حلف يزداد ثقة وحلف يزداد شكوكاً وإحباطاً. حلف يزرع الانتصارات وحلف يحصد الهزائم. دمشق تنفض غبار الحرب عنها وتحتفل بيوم القدس وتراه قريباً، والرياض تتقلّص طموحاتها من انتظار يوم سقوط دمشق لتهتف إنه يومك يا ابن نايف ويومك يا قطر.

(Visited 3٬145 times, 3٬145 visits today)
Related Videos

Related Articles

From the truce of Daraa and “Tanf’s encirclement” to the plane’s dropping من هدنة درعا و«كباش التنف» إلى إسقاط الطائرة

From the truce of Daraa and “Tanf’s encirclement” to the plane’s dropping

يونيو 22, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

image_1_1

The interpretation promoted by the armed groups in the southern of Syria about an unilateral truce announced by the Syrian army through linking it with the losses of the army, its need to take a breath, and the failure of its military campaign is not compatible with the field facts and the important achievements of the Syrian army that made it close to the borders of Jordan, and it is not compatible with the response of the armed groups to the truce which they a supposed to refuse if this interpretation was right, moreover it is not compatible with the announced US support which was accompanied with the Jordanian support through calling the armed groups to stop their military actions and processes. The intention is to stop what was so-called a month ago “the southern front process” and the accompanying American Jordanian words about the intention to work inside the Syrian territories.

The US failure coincides with imposing a military fait accompli in the southern of Syria and with accepting the Syrian truce within the Russian –American communication channels, it coincides also with imposing a fait accompli by the Syrian and the Iraqi armies and the Popular Crowd on the Syrian-Iraqi borders, that made the US seeking to have control on the borders an impossible matter as long as the groups on which the Americans depend in the ground progress and under their air coverage have become at the south of the deployment of the Syrian army and at the north of the deployment of the Iraqi army, and what is left between the army and the popular crowd is only ISIS, there is no way for the Americans to enter after the area has become pure Syrian Iraqi, and it became clear the presence of the will and the ability to end the presence of ISIS towards the crossings of  Al Kaem and Boukamal, and to complete the encirclement around ISIS in Mayadeen and Deir Al Zour.

The three points on which the Americans depended to prolong the chaos in Syria and to manage it are first; having control on the northern front in the war on ISIS, because of the critical presence of ISIS in the south, to keep the legitimacy of the US presence under the pretext of the war on terrorism, and the cooperation coverage with Syrian component which is the Kurdish groups in exchange of supporting them in their separation plan. The second point is based on having control on the Syrian-Iraqi borders and having control across the borders on the economic, political and military connection  between the two countries, as well as closing the connection between the resistance axis and its strategic base which is represented by Iran, while the third point is by igniting the southern front to open the door of negotiation entitled to stop the war in the south in exchange of the withdrawal of Hezbollah, according to the Israeli security vision.

There is nothing suggests that the US-Syrian attraction or the rapprochement has ended, and there is nothing indicates that Washington has reconsidered its plan to prolong the chaos and manage it in favor of the involvement in the policy of settlements which its title forms the sticking to the unity of the Syrian territories. All of what was retreated by the Americans is what was imposed on them strongly, therefore the dropping of the Syrian plane in the southern of Raqqa by the Americans is to send a message that the US adaptation with the compromises of the south and the middle and the fall of two sides of the US triangle does not mean the recognition of the fall of the third side automatically. Washington feels that the war on ISIS is no longer under its control, so after the withdrawal of ISIS towards Mayadeen and Deir Al Zour on one hand, and after the closure of the roads to Badia and having control on them by the army and the allies on the other hand, as well as the progress of the Syrian army and its allies in the front of the southern of Raqqa, it became the battle of the Syrian army more than being a battle of the Kurdish groups which is wanted by Washington as an exclusive director of the war to control its tracks, so the dropping of the plane is to remind of this exclusivity, but this will not be accepted by Syria and it will respond to it as it should be. The response’s beginnings were by the long-range Iranian missiles which targeted the strongholds of ISIS in Deir Al Zour in order to show that the final battle with ISIS which Deir Al Zour will be its arena will not be waged according to the US agenda.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

 

(Visited 6 times, 6 visits today)

 

من هدنة درعا و«كباش التنف» إلى إسقاط الطائرة

يونيو 19, 2017

image_1_1ناصر قنديل

– لا يستقيم التفسير الذي تسوقه الجماعات المسلحة في جنوب سورية للهدنة المعلنة من جانب واحد من الجيش السوري، بربطها بخسائر الجيش وحاجته لالتقاط الأنفاس وفشل حملته العسكرية مع وقائع الميدان وتحقيق الجيش إنجازات هامة جعلته على مقربة من حدود الأردن، ولا مع استجابة الجماعات المسلحة نفسها للهدنة، التي يفترض أن ترفضها إذا كان تفسيرها صحيحاً، ولا مع التأييد الأميركي المعلن والذي سحب معه تأييداً أردنياً مشفوعاً بدعوة الجماعات المسلحة لوقف أنشطتها العسكرية وعملياتها والمقصود الإعلان عن وقف ما عُرف خلال شهر مضى بعملية الجبهة الجنوبية وما رافقها من كلام أميركي أردني عن نيات العمل داخل الأراضي السورية.

– يتزامن الفشل الأميركي في فرض أمر واقع عسكري جنوب سورية وقبول أميركا الهدنة السورية، ضمن قنوات الاتصال الروسية الأميركية، تزامن مع فرض الجيشين السوري والعراقي والحشد الشعبي أمراً واقعاً على الحدود السورية العراقية، جعل السعي الأميركي لوضع اليد على خط الحدود، مستحيلاً طالما أنّ الجماعات التي يعتمد عليها الأميركيون للتقدّم البري بغطائهم الجوي صارت جنوب خط انتشار الجيش السوري وشمال خط انتشار الحشد الشعبي، وما بين الجيش والحشد داعش فقط، ولا طريق للأميركيين بعد للدخول إلى منطقة الوسط التي صارت سورية عراقية صرفة، وصار واضحاً وجود الإرادة والقدرة على إسقاط وجود داعش فيها وصولاً لمعبري القائم والبوكمال، واكتمال الطوق على داعش في الميادين ودير الزور.

– الأضلاع الثلاثة التي بنى عليها الأميركيون خطتهم لإدامة الفوضى في سورية وإدارتها، قامت على إمساك جبهة الشمال في الحرب على داعش، لحاجة وجود داعش جنوباً لا القضاء عليه، والحفاظ على شرعية البقاء الأميركي بذريعة الحرب على الإرهاب وغطاء التعاون مع مكوّن سوري هو الجماعات الكردية، بوعد دعمهم بخطة الانفصال أما الضلع الثاني في الوسط فيقوم على إمساك الحدود السورية العراقية والتحكم عبر الحدود بالتواصل الاقتصادي والسياسي والعسكري بين البلدين، وإغلاق خط التواصل بين محور المقاومة وقاعدته الاستراتيجية التي تشكلها إيران أمام الضلع الثالث فهو إشعال جبهة الجنوب لفتح باب تفاوض عنوانه وقف الحرب في الجنوب مقابل انسحاب حزب الله، وفقاً لرؤية الأمن «الإسرائيلي» هناك.

– ليس هناك ما يوحي بأنّ التجاذب أو الكباش الأميركي السوري قد انتهى، ولا ما يشير إلى أنّ واشنطن قد أعادت النظر بخطتها لإدامة الفوضى وإدارتها لحساب الانخراط في سياسة التسويات التي يشكل عنوانها التمسك بوحدة التراب السوري. فكلّ ما تراجع عنه الأميركيون هو ما فُرض عليهم بالقوة، ولذلك تأتي عملية إسقاط الطائرة السورية جنوب الرقة، من قبل الأميركيين لتوصل رسالة مفادها أنّ التأقلم الأميركي مع معادلات الجنوب والوسط وسقوط ضلعين من المثلث الأميركي لا يعني التسليم بسقوط الثالث تلقائياً، فواشنطن تشعر بخروج الحرب على داعش من تحت إبطها لتصير مع انسحاب داعش نحو الميادين ودير الزور من جهة، وبعد إقفال الجيش والحلفاء لطرق البادية وإمساكهم بها من جهة ثانية، وتقدّم الجيش السوري وحلفائه على جبهة جنوب الرقة من جهة ثالثة، معركة الجيش السوري أكثر مما هي معركة الجماعات الكردية التي تريدها واشنطن مديراً حصرياً للحرب، للتحكّم بمساراتها، وإسقاط الطائرة يريد التذكير بهذه الحصرية، وهو ما لن تقبله سورية، وستردّ عليه كما يجب، وقد جاءت بدايات الجواب بالصواريخ الإيرانية البعيدة المدى التي استهدفت معاقل داعش في دير الزور، لتقول إنّ المعركة الفاصلة مع داعش التي ستكون دير الزور مسرحها، لن تكون معركة تخاض وفق الأجندة الأميركية…

(Visited 6٬270 times, 51 visits today)
Related Videos

Related Articles

US Intervention in Syria at Crossroads

The U.S. military incursion into Syria is literally at a crossroads, with U.S.-backed forces cut off at Al-Tanf where two strategic highways intersect and where President Trump may decide to escalate, says Daniel Lazare.

By Daniel Lazare

June 19, 2017 “Information Clearing House” – The U.S. has stumbled into a trap in the Syrian desert town of Al-Tanf, and the big question now is whether it will stay, leave, or try to save face by putting on a show of force. Given the crisis mentality in Washington these days, the answer is likely the last. If so, the effect will be to take a bad situation and make it much, much worse.

Al-Tanf is strategically important because it straddles an east-west international highway as it branches off to the north, crossing into southern Syria and continuing on to Damascus and Beirut. Since the highway serves as a supply line linking Shi‘ite population centers in Iran and Iraq with those in western Syria and southern Lebanon, the U.S. thought that by severing the supply line at Al-Tanf, located just a few miles north of the Iraqi and Jordanian borders, it could check a bid by Syria’s ally Iran to open up a corridor to the Mediterranean, strengthening the so-called “Shi‘ite crescent.”

But U.S. ambitions did not stop at dashing Iran’s strategic dreams in its regional Shi’ite-Sunni rivalry with Saudi Arabia. Beyond cutting off the road’s northern branch, the U.S. floated plans to convert the southern route into a modern U.S.-style toll road complete with service stations, rest stops, and cafés. The roadway would then be under the control of a military-linked security firm, the Reston, Virginia-based Constellis, which happens to be the owner of Academi, formerly known as Blackwater, whose heavily armed security guards were convicted of massacring 17 civilians in Nisour Square, Baghdad, in 2007.

So, instead of a supply route linking far-flung Shi‘ite population centers, the upshot would be a U.S.-controlled highway connecting Sunni-dominated Anbar Province in western Iraq with Sunni-majority Jordan – a neat trick if the U.S. could pull it off. In the interim, the United States, which does not have permission from the Syrian government to have military forces inside Syria, sought to expand the U.S. desert garrison in Al-Tanf by unilaterally declaring a “de-confliction zone” extending 34 miles in every direction and defending it by force.

On May 18, U.S. aircraft struck a column of pro-government fighters that had allegedly strayed over the perimeter. On June 6, the U.S. military struck other pro-government forces accused of doing the same, while on June 8, a U.S. warplane shot down an Iranian drone. With U.S. patrols ranging as far as 60 miles away, the United States was extending its sway over a larger and larger portion of southeastern Syria. Soon, no traffic would be able to enter from Iraq without express U.S. approval.

Of course, the ultimate goal may have even been bigger: to link up the Al-Tanf garrison with U.S.-backed forces fighting to oust Islamic State militants from their self-declared capital of Raqqa, some 150 miles to the north.

Letting ISIS Reposition

Indeed, Sergey Surovikin, commander of Russia’s Syria forces, accused the U.S. on June 9 of allowing hundreds of Islamic State fighters to flee Raqqa for Palmyra, a hundred miles or so to the south. With Islamic State (also known as ISIS) strengthened in the central part of the country, the effect would be to block the Damascus government’s drive to the east. With the Syrian army immobilized, U.S.-backed forces would be in a position to seize more territory as ISIS resistance crumbles.

But then the Syrian army did the unexpected. Racing down from the north, it swept across more than a hundred miles of desert to reach the Iraqi border between Al-Tanf and the Euphrates for the first time since 2015. By linking up with Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Units on the Iraqi side, the effect was to cut off U.S. forces from the Euphrates. The outcome was ironic because the U.S. is fighting alongside the Popular Mobilization Units against ISIS in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, yet the PMU forces were now coordinating with Damascus to bottle up the U.S. in southern Syria.

“[T]he US invaders are now sitting in the mid[st] of a piece of rather useless desert around Al-Tanf,” the often insightful “Moon of Alabama” website chortled, “where their only option is to die of boredom or to move back to Jordan from where they came.”

Not that staying put is entirely pointless since it would allow the U.S. to maintain its roadblock on the Baghdad-Damascus highway. But with the Syrian army controlling the border zone farther to the east in conjunction with the Iranian-backed PMU, it’s hard to see how the Damascus regime will not be able to re-route traffic around it.

So ultimately the most sensible solution would be for the U.S. forces to pack up their bags and leave. But sensible solutions don’t count for much in an over-heated Washington in which President Trump is struggling to hold on amid intense pressure to get tough with Syria, Iran and Russia at all costs.

After all, the purpose of Trump’s visit to Riyadh last month was not just to sell arms, but to announce the formation of an all-Sunni “Arab NATO” aimed at launching a new anti-Iranian offensive across the entire region. More than an embarrassment, retreating to Jordan would therefore signal that the U.S. is over-extended and that its reliance on proxy forces like the Free Syrian Army or the Kurdish-backed Syrian Democratic Forces in Raqqa has come to naught. As currently formulated, the strategy is stuck – unless Trump orders a significant escalation.

Given all that, the military’s decision to move its High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) from Jordan to Al-Tanf is not a good sign. Manufactured by Lockheed Martin, such truck-mounted rockets have a range of 180 miles, nearly enough to reach the Euphrates. But to what end? The target can’t be ISIS since its local militants are already on the run. Instead, they seem to be aimed at the Syrian army whose forces are now blocking U.S. access to the east just as the U.S. had sought to block Syrian access.

A Plunge into Incoherence

After a series of potshots at pro-government forces in recent weeks, could it be that the United States is gearing up for something more serious? If so, it would be yet another step into incoherence.

Even though U.S. propaganda maintains that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has no interest in fighting ISIS and is in fact somehow responsible for its rise, the Syrian army is in fact the most effective anti-ISIS force on the field.

As IHS Markit, a London analytics firm with extensive aerospace and defense experience, noted in an April 19 report, government forces over the previous 12 months had engaged Islamic State in battle two and a half times as often as U.S.-backed forces had. “Any further reduction in the capability of Syria’s already overstretched forces,” it went on, “would reduce their ability to prevent the Islamic State from pushing out of the desert into the more heavily populated western Syria, threatening cities like Homs and Damascus.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Trump Submits to Neocon Orthodoxy.”]

If the U.S. is really preparing to challenge the Syrian army head on, in other words, ISIS will be the likeliest beneficiary since it will gain an opportunity to rally and regroup and break free of its desert confines. Syria’s agony will continue while the U.S. will find itself bogged down in a wider war.

In a recent appearance on RT’s Crosstalk television program, the Beirut-based journalist Sharmine Narwani noted that American reliance on diverse local forces may have sowed the seeds for the present impasse. The Syrian Democratic Forces, the mixed Kurdish-Arab force that the U.S. backs in Raqqa, is an outgrowth of the People’s Protection Units, known by the Kurdish acronym YPG, which are themselves a project of the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan views as no less a terrorist than ISIS or Al Qaeda.

“When the Americans told the Turks they had could have no part of the operations in Raqqa,” Narwani said, “the Turks understood that the Americans were looking to create a little Kurdish state in the north. And they collaborated, I believe, with their Qatari allies, and in this last month, we have seen all the Qatari and Turkish-back groups suddenly go really quiet in Syria, which allows the Syrian army to focus on their border with Iraq and on ISIS – which has not pleased the Americans.” (Quote starts at 2:40.)

Turkey and Qatar are getting back at the U.S. by giving Assad free rein. Both Turkey and Qatar are unhappy with various aspects of U.S.-Saudi policy – with U.S. encouragement of Kurdish separatism, for instance, or with a war drive against Iran that is plainly contrary to Qatar’s economic and political interests.

This is why Turkey is sending 3,000 troops to Qatar as protection against a Saudi incursion, why Qatar may be cooperating with Turkey in Syria, and why the U.S. finds itself stranded in Al-Tanf. It is also why Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt’s pro-Saudi military dictator, has called on the Saudis to extend their boycott from Qatar to Turkey, a sign, perhaps, of a wider conflict to come.

Where Trump had hoped for unity against Iran, he has wound up with the opposite. Other than Egypt and Bahrain – virtually a Saudi protectorate at this point – few other Sunni countries have signed up for the new Saudi crusade against Qatar, which has important commercial ties with Iran. Oman and Kuwait are both holding off; Morocco has offered to supply Qatar with emergency food shipments; Iraq is neutral. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia are like a pair of generals charging out onto the battlefield only to discover that the army behind them has melted away.

So, will the U.S. do something drastic to break out of its encirclement in Al-Tanf, as foolhardy as that escalation might be? Knowing Trump and his desperation to change the subject from the Russia investigation, the answer may well be yes.

Daniel Lazare is the author of several books including The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy (Harcourt Brace). 

This article was first published by Consortium News

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

 

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

كل المتحاربين على الحدود السورية ـ العراقية… ماذا بعد؟

 

يونيو 19, 2017

د. عصام نعمان

المشهد بات واضحاً: كلّ المتحاربين في سورية والعراق أضحوا متواجدين على طول الحدود بين الدولتين وفي مناطق أخرى متفرقة، فماذا يمكن أن يحدث في الأيام والأسابيع والأشهر المقبلة؟

الولايات المتحدة متواجدة هناك براً وجواً. في البرّ لها قاعدة عسكرية قرب بلدة التنف السورية الواقعة على مسافة 18 كيلومتراً من الحدود الأردنية، وقد نقلت أخيراً الى داخل سورية منظومتين لراجمات الصواريخ من طراز «هيمارس» من مستودع أسلحتها الثقيلة في الأردن. في الجوّ لها طائراتها وصواريخها العاملة تحت مظلة «التحالف الدولي» والمنطلقة من حاملات طائراتها في البحر المتوسط ومن قاعدتها الجوية «انجرليك» في تركيا. الى ذلك، لأميركا قوات من مشاة البحرية داعمة لقوات «قسد» الكردية الناشطة في محافظة الرقة السورية، كما لها قوات برية في محافظة نينوى الموصل العراقية تضمّ ضباطاً بصفة «مستشارين» لمساندة الجيش العراقي.

روسيا متواجدة في سورية براً وجواً وبحراً أيضاً. في البر لها قاعدتان في حميميم وطرطوس تضمان قوات برية وطائرات حربية، كما لها كتائب عسكرية برية تدعم الجيش السوري في أنحاء متفرقة من البلاد. وفي البحر لها سفن حربية حاملة للطائرات المروحية وقاذفات الصواريخ، بالإضافة إلى قواعدها في البر الروسي القادرة على إطلاق صواريخ بعيدة المدى تقع سورية في نطاقها العملاني.

تركيا موجودة في مواقع عدّة شمال سورية، ولاسيما في جرابلس والباب وقرب منبج وعلى الحدود مع محافظة ادلب السورية، وهي لا تتوانى عن استخدام طائراتها الحربية المنطلقة من قواعدها الجوية في الداخل التركي.

إيران موجودة عسكرياً في العراق وسورية من خلال مجموعات من الضباط المستشارين الذين يساندون جيشيْ الدولتين في معظم المواقع التي تشهد معارك واشتباكات مع تنظيم «داعش». غير أنّ تطوراً لافتاً حدث قبل أيام، بحسب صحيفة «ازفستيا» الروسية، هو «أن تدفق الأسلحة الإيرانية الى القوات النظامية السورية بات سلساً بعد وصول القوات النظامية إلى الحدود العراقية عبر شق ممر لنقل الأسلحة عبر العراق في موقع يبعد 20 كيلومتراً من معبر التنف». كما نسبت وسائل إعلامية موالية للغرب إلى مواقع الكترونية إيرانية نشرَ صورٍ لجنود من «لواء فاطميون» الأفغاني ومعهم قائد «فيلق القدس» في الحرس الثوري الإيراني اللواء قاسم سليماني قالت إنهم يحتشدون في منطقةٍ على الحدود العراقية – السورية.

كل المتحاربين، اذاً، موجودون وناشطون مباشرةً بقواتهم أو مداورةً بتنظيماتٍ تقاتل بالوكالة عنهم، فماذا يمكن أن يحدث في الأيام والأسابيع والأشهر المقبلة؟

دونالد ترامب وعد بالإعلان عن استراتيجية لأميركا خلال الأسابيع الستة المقبلة. لكن مؤشراتها ظهرت سريعاً بتحريك جيشه لمنظومة من راجمات الصواريخ «هيرماس» إلى داخل سورية، يقول ضباطٌ روس إن مداها لا يصل الى ميادين القتال في الرقة، وبالتالي فهي غير قادرة على دعم قوات «قسد» الكردية المتحالفة مع الولايات المتحدة وبالتالي لا يبقى لها من دور عملاني مفترض إلاّ ضرب القوات السورية الزاحفة لتحرير محافظة دير الزور من سيطرة «داعش» أو المتجهة إلى استعادة منطقة التنف.

ضباط أركان روس حذّروا الولايات المتحدة من مغبة الانزلاق الى قصف القوات النظامية السورية العاملة على مدى البادية السورية كلها من جنوب الرقة شمالاً الى منطقة التنف جنوباً. التحذير الروسي تزامن، ربما بشكل مقصود، مع كشف صحيفة «ازفستيا» واقعة تدفق الأسلحة الإيرانية عبر ممر على الحدود العراقية السورية يبعد 20 كيلومتراً من معبر التنف. كلّ ذلك في وقت يبدو قاطعاً تصميم الجيشين السوري والعراقي على إحكام سيطرتهما على الحدود بين الدولتين من الشمال إلى الجنوب.

هذه التطوّرات المتسارعة تطرح سؤالاً ملحاحاً: ما جدوى بقاء الأميركيين في منطقة معبر التنف الحدودي ما دام الجيشان السوري والعراقي آمّنا معبراً سالكاً الى الشمال منه يمكّن إيران من نقل أسلحتها الى الجيش السوري والى التنظيمات المساندة له؟

لا يغيب عن أذهان المراقبين أن إدارة باراك أوباما كانت وعدت «إسرائيل» بدعم التنظيمات الإرهابية المقاتلة في سورية بما يؤدي إلى تقسيمها أو، أقلّه، إلى تقاسم السيطرة والنفوذ فيها على نحوٍ يُضعفها فلا يعود في وسعها كدولة سيدة أن تبقى متحالفة مع إيران أو قادرة على إمرار الأسلحة منها إلى تنظيمات المقاومة اللبنانية حزب الله والفلسطينية حماس وبالتالي عاجزة عن احتضان قواعد صاروخية إيرانية مُهدِّدة للكيان الصهيوني.

لا غلوّ في القول إن المخطط الأميركي آنف الذكر بات غير قابل للتحقيق بعد تقدّم الجيشين السوري والعراقي في عملية السيطرة على حدود الدولتين. لكن ذلك لا يعني بالضرورة أن إدارة ترامب قد أسقطت المخطط المذكور من حسابها إذ من الممكن، خلال قيامها بوضع استراتيجية جديدة للشرق الأوسط، أن تعيد إحياء المخطط القديم الرامي الى تقسيم سورية. ذلك يتمّ باعتماد سياسة حكومة نتنياهو التي تدعو الى وقف محاربة «داعش» والتعاون معه بغية محاربة الجيش السوري وحلفائه للحؤول دون ترسيخ نفوذ إيران في سورية.

غير أنّ أمراً لافتاً حدث أخيراً هو قيام الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة انطونيو غوتيريش بالدعوة الى بحث الحالة في الجولان ضمن «العملية السياسية» الجارية في سورية، وذلك بالتزامن مع «تأهب» القوة الدولية «اندوف» المنتشرة هناك «لزيادة متوقّعَة في عملياتها» في المرحلة المقبلة، واستعدادها لنشر كتيبة مشاة آلية خلال أسابيع قليلة في الجزء الشمالي من منطقة الفصل.

هل تحرّك غوتيريش بإيعاز من واشنطن يشي بتعذّر تنفيذ مخططها آنف الذكر، أم بتشجيعٍ من دول الاتحاد الأوروبي التي لا تشاطر الولايات المتحدة سياستها العدوانية في سورية والعراق؟

ثمّة صعوبة في الإجابة عن هذا السؤال قبل اتضاح توجهات القوى المتحاربةً المحتشدة على طول الحدود السورية العراقية…

(Visited 269 times, 269 visits today)
Related Videos

Related Articles

Syria – The End Of The War Is Now In Sight

By Moon Of Alabama

A look at recent developments in Syria. [Updated below June 14 1:00am EDT]


Source: Al Watan Onlinebigger

June 14, 2017 “Information Clearing House” –  The most important change over the last days was the Syrian government forces move (red areas and arrows) in the south-east towards the Iraqi border. The original plan was to retrieve al-Tanf further south-west to secure the border crossing of the Damascus-Baghdad highway there. But al-Tanf was occupied by U.S., British and Norwegian invaders and some of their proxy forces (blue). Their airplanes attacked Syrian army convoys when they approached. The U.S. plan was to move from al-Tanf north towards the Euphrates river and to thereby capture and control the whole south-east of Syria. But Syria and its allies made an unexpected move and prevented that plan. The invaders are now cut off from the Euphrates by a Syrian west-to-east line that ends at the Iraqi border. On the Iraqi side elements of the Popular Military Unites under the command of the Iraqi government are moving to meet the Syrian forces at the border.

The U.S. invaders are now sitting in the mid of a piece of rather useless desert around al-Tanf where their only option is to die of boredom or to move back to Jordan from where they came. The Russian military has made it very clear that it would intervene forcefully should the U.S. attack the Syrian line and move further north. The U.S. and its allies have no mandate to be in Syria in the first place. There is no justification or legal ground for them to attack any Syrian units. Their only option now is to retreat.

The U.S. move into al-Tanf was covered by an attack of U.S. proxy forces in the south-west of Syria. A large group of “rebels”, which include al-Qaeda elements and is supplied from Jordan, moved to take the city of Deraa from Syrian government control. It was hoped that this attack would divert Syrian forces from their move east. But despite the use of suicide bombers the attack on Deraa failed to overwhelm the strong defenses of the Syrian forces. It did not provide the necessary diversion. The Syrian position in Deraa was reinforced by units from Damascus which are now attacking the U.S. proxy gangs. Significant progress was made today in the southern suburbs of Deraa and the Syrian army attack will likely continue the move until it has reached the Jordanian border.

The U.S. plans in south Syria, in the west as well as in the east, have failed for now. Unless the Trump administration is willing to invest significant more forces and to openly and against all laws wage war on the Syria government and its allies the situation there is contained. The Syrian forces will over time recapture all the (blue colored) land in the south that is currently held by the various U.S. proxies and other terrorist groups.

In the north-west the Takfiri “rebel” groups are concentrated around Idleb and further north. These groups are sponsored by Saudi, Qatari and Turkish money. The recent spat between Qatar and other Gulf states has throw the Idleb situation into further chaos. Saudi sponsored groups are now fighting Qatari and Turkish sponsored groups. These conflicts come on top of other animosities between al-Qaeda aligned forces and those of Ahrar al-Sham. The Syrian government forces keep the province surrounded and Turkey in the north has kept its border mostly closed. The Takfiri “rebels” in Idleb will cook in their own juices until they are well done and completely exhausted. Eventually government forces will move in and destroy whatever is left of them.

In the center of the map the Syrian army (red) arrows are pointing towards the central desert areas held by ISIS forces which are retreating towards the east (black arrows). Moving simultaneously from the north, west and south the Syrian government forces make fast progress with several kilometers of ground retaken each day. During the last month 4,000 square kilometers and over 100 settlements and towns have been recovered. Within a few weeks they will have recovered all the (brown) ISIS held areas up to the Euphrates river line and the Syrian-Iraqi border.

Russian military bridging equipment recently started to arrive in Syria. It will be needed to cross the Euphrates and to recover the areas north of it.

Meanwhile U.S. supported Kurdish forces (yellow arrows) are attacking the ISIS held city of Raqqa. The Russian military command claims (video) that the Kurds and the U.S. made a deal with ISIS to let its fighters leave Raqqa towards the south and east. The fast progress the Kurds are making in taking the city supports that claim. There seems to be barely any Islamic State resistance left.

All ISIS forces left in Syria, those coming from Raqqa as well as those from the desert areas, are moving east along the Euphrates towards the city of Deir Ezzor. There as many as 100,000+ government aligned civilians and a Syrian army garrison have long been surrounded by ISIS forces. The besieged people are supplied by air drops. The Syrian military garrison has long held off the attacking ISIS forces. But with thousands of new Islamic State forces coming towards the city the government troops are in real danger of getting overwhelmed. Reinforcements must be flown into the city to keep ISIS off and to prevent a very large massacre. A much better alternative is a relief line on the ground. But the Syrian army race towards the city had been delayed by the U.S. shenanigans in the south. A new large ground move of government forces towards Deir Ezzor is in preparation. One can only hope that they arrive in time.

Qatari, Saudi and Turkish proxy forces, directed by the CIA, have waged a six year long war against Syria and its people. With Qatar and Turkey now in opposition to the Saudis and their U.S. allies, the gang that attacked Syria is falling apart. The Islamic State is shrinking fast and nearly defeated. The U.S. attempt to gain ground in the south has been stopped. Unless the U.S. changes tact and starts a large scale attack on Syria with its own army forces the war on Syria is over. Many areas still need to be recovered by Syrian forces. Terrorist attacks within the country will continue for several years. The wounds will take decades to heal. Negotiations will have to be held over areas in the north now under Turkish or U.S. (proxy) control. Further settlements will have to be reached. But the large scale strategic war against Syria has for now ended.

No one has won anything. The Kurds, which for while looked like the sole winner of the war, have just thrown away their gains.

The U.S. supported Kurdish forces of the YPG made the lunatic error of openly asking for support from Saudi Arabia. The anarcho-marxists of the YPG, always proudly showing off their feminism, are suddenly bowing down in front of the medieval Wahhabi nutters. They thus ruined their appearance of being a progressive leftist force. This move will reinforce Turkish and Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian animosity and hostility against them. All political advances they made during the war by staying mostly neutral between “rebels” and the Syrian government is now in jeopardy. The move is crazy. The Kurdish held area is completely surrounded by more or less hostile forces. U.S. or Saudi support for the land-locked and encircled Kurdish enclave is not sustainable over any longer time-frame. The Kurds have thus again demonstrated that they are their own worst enemies in their striving for a (semi-)sovereign Kurdish state. They will be thrown back into their original areas and again be folded up into the Syrian state.

[UPDATE:]

Secretary of Defense Mattis was questioned in Congress yesterday about the situation in Syria. There is no transcript yet but here are some tweets from a Stars & Stripes journalist who attended:

Tara Copp‏ @TaraCopp – 3:11 PM – 13 Jun 2017

#SecDef Mattis says “pro regime” forces that have moved into S. Syria near #AnTanf base are actually #Russian 1/2
#SecDef Mattis: “I did not anticipate that the #Russians would move there (near At Tanf.) … it was not a surprise to our intel people.”

The U.S. had claimed that the Syrian government aligned forces moving towards al-Tanf were “Iran backed” or “Iran led”. Now the Secretary of Defense says that was a lie. They were Russians allied with the Syrian government. The Russians certainly do not take their orders from some Iranian generals. It is no wonder than that the Russian command issued strong warnings against any attacks on these forces.

Mattis also exposes that he is incapable of strategic thinking. He really believed that Russian would not move to al-Tanf to cover for their Syrian comrades? It has been clear your months now that the Russians are all-in in Syria. They will not let the Syrian government fall to make nice with Mattis or Trump or anyone else. The strategic issue for them is clear and has been for a while. They will fight. They said so. It was utterly stupid to believe anything else.

Al-Tanf is a tactical issue but the U.S. military elevates it to a strategic one. This is clearly not justified. We have to ask again what the possible gains for the U.S. are from defending that place in the empty desert. There is none to be had but defending it out of “principle” could evidently start a much bigger war.

[T]he Tanf garrison is now surrounded by hostile forces. The U.S. forces in the area would have to fight through regime positions to get to al Bukamal, further risking escalation.

What now? Is the United States prepared to protect these forces in perpetuity? Will the U.S. provide air cover for forces that clash directly with regime allied assets outside of the 55-kilometer zone? Did the previous three strikes prompt a counter-escalatory act that undermined U.S. interests? Sadly, the answer to the last question is yes.

Strategy should drive tactics when it comes to handling Iranian-backed elements in Syria, not the other way around.

The United States has the capability to defend a garrison in the Syrian desert. However, the reasons for doing so are devoid of any purpose, making a simple cost benefit analysis all but impossible.

That insight has obviously not yet reached the Defense Department and the U.S. command on the ground. The local U.S. commander moved a U.S. HIMARS long-range artillery system from Jordan to al-Tanf. HIMARS has a range of 300 kilometers. It makes no difference from a tactical perspective if its fires from Jordan or from al-Tanf in Syria some 12 kilometers east of the border line. It is a symbolic move to “show flag” in al-Tanf but it exposes the system to a legitimate attack by Syrian, Russian and Iranian forces.

As Secretary of State Tillerson rightly said: The U.S. has no legal authority to attack Syrian, Iranian or Russian forces. None at all. It is invading Syria with no legitimate reason. Syria, in contrast, has the legal authority to throw the U.S. troops out.

To move the HIMARS to al-Tanf is utterly stupid grandstanding. It is high time for Washington to shut such nonsense down.

This article was first published by Moon Of Alabama

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

ISIS ON THE VERGE OF BEING ANNIHILATED IN EASTERN ALEPPO AND SOUTHWESTERN RAQQA. ARAK AND T3 COMPLEXES LIBERATED.

Ziad Fadel

“Exclusive to Syrper” by Canthama

 

EAST/NORTHEAST/SOUTHEAST PALMYRA 

As mentioned yesterday in the Syrper comment section, the triangle made up by the Arak village, Arak gas field, T3 complex were all liberated. Sometimes the process of villages/sites liberation goes through a longer path such as:

  • battles on the outskirts,
  • fire control,
  • inner site battles,
  • fake retreats,
  • IEDs/mines cleaning and finally
  • full MoD liberation announcement.

image:

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.603824&lon=38.535919&z=11&m=b

 

We have seen this process over and over, sometimes shorter sometimes longer, Arak/T3 falls into the longer path category.
The latest information from this front accounts to 5th Corps, Liwa al Quds, Hezbollah and the newly arrived 103rd Republican Guards advance to enlarge the safety perimeter around the newly liberated area in Arak/T3. ISIS is currently attempting several counter attacks in the area to delay quicker advances by the SAA, which under the apparent new Syrian High Command military doctrine, the enemy’s counter attacks are exploited to the maximum in reverse, meaning, it used to increase enemy’s casualties and to create vacuum areas behind enemy’s lines. This process has also shown excellent results over the past 18 months in Syria, you can see this path repeating itself in many of the battles fought since early 2016.

Next targets to be liberated by the allied forces are as follows, in the path to Der ez Zor:

  • Sabkhat Ḩisyān al Munbaţiḩ area and its farms around it-following the pipeline to Der ez Zor.
  • Bi’r al Bayāţirah and the vital Bir Al Jafeef, one of the most important crossroad in the Syrian desert, it gives access to several water wells and reservoirs. It is a must do prior to the capture of the village of Humaymah in the T3-T2 road.
  • Should we hear battles near the al Hail and Doubayat gas fields, it may mean the allied forces selected the pipeline way toward Der ez Zor (in fact the shortest one) while by passing al Sukhanah ISIS stronghold. It is a risky option but with proper flanking protection further south by crossing T3-T2 road, it can be managed in a wider spearhead type of front (similar to previous Palmyra advances and Tiger Force style advances).

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.383679&lon=38.783112&z=11&m=b

 

ITHRIYAH-SAFIYEH ROAD

 

The Tiger Force’s path to control of the Safieyh crossroad was anticipated at Syrper earlier last week, when we mentioned that after the battle for Maskaneh the Tiger Forces and allies would spearhead straight toward this important and strategic crossroad, there were many reason for doing that such as:

  • Control SDF expansion south of Tabqa airbase,
  • Control the many profitable gas and oil fields in southern Raqqa Province,
  • Cut ISIS from a critical crossroad that controls movement to eastern Hama and Central Homs,
  • Shape a cauldron in eastern Khanaser to flush ISIS from it without battles and time loss,
  • Shape a new cauldron in eastern Hama and central Homs in an attempt to push ISIS to few mountain roads in and out of the intended new cauldron.

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.256834&lon=38.419189&z=9&m=b&gz=0;378739929;348611442;164794;4416536;8596801;3855964;8843994;5626046;12551879;2756118;7896423;0;8129882;1452338;0;1452338

 

Latest news on this front line points to further advanced eastwards from Safieyh crossroad and the liberation of more oil and gas fields, such as Thawrah and very close to liberate the Waheb and Ammala fields south of Safieyh crossroad.

A critical point is the approach toward the Ithriyah gas field, which would indicate the fire control of Zakia crossroad and the final closure of eastern Khanaser cauldron.

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.440393&lon=38.091831&z=12&m=b

 

DARAA CITY

 

News from Daraa will soon emerge from MoD with the full liberation of the Palestinian camp, the impressive advance by the 4th Mechanized Division and its allies.

The battle for Daraa city is part of the much larger battle for the Syria-Jordan and Syria-Iraq borders control. Both Syria’s and Iraq’s Government are completely aligned on the path to liberate all Syria-Iraq border as shown in the recent picture taken by the High Command meeting from both military organizations in Baghdad.

Excellent short video from a Syrian reporter in the Syria-Iraq desert border on the human aspect of this war and its heroes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZZmQqKeHr0

Read more 

 

Tehran Was Always America’s and Thus the Islamic State’s Final Destination

June 10, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – Several were left dead and many more injured after coordinated terror attacks on Iran’s capital of Tehran. Shootings and bombings targeted Iran’s parliament and the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeini.

According to Reuters, the so-called “Islamic State” claimed responsibility for the attack, which unfolded just days after another terror attack unfolded in London. The Islamic State also reportedly took responsibility for the violence in London, despite evidence emerging that the three suspects involved were long-known to British security and intelligence agencies and were simply allowed to plot and carry out their attacks.

It is much less likely that Tehran’s government coddled terrorists -as it has been engaged for years in fighting terrorism both on its borders and in Syria amid a vicious six-year war fueled by US, European, and Persian Gulf weapons, cash, and fighters.

Armed Violence Targeting Tehran Was the Stated Goal of US Policymakers

The recent terrorist attacks in Tehran are the literal manifestation of US foreign policy. The creation of a proxy force with which to fight Iran and establishing a safe haven for it beyond Iran’s borders have been long-stated US policy. The current chaos consuming Syria and Iraq – and to a lesser extent in southeast Turkey – is a direct result of the US attempting to secure a base of operations to launch a proxy war directly against Iran.

In the 2009 Brookings Institution document titled, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran,” the use of then US State Department-listed foreign terrorist organization Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) as a proxy for instigating a full-fledged armed insurgency not unlike that which is currently unfolding in Syria was discussed in detail.

The report explicitly stated:

The United states could also attempt to promote external Iranian opposition groups, providing them with the support to turn themselves into full-fledged insurgencies and even helping them militarily defeat the forces of the clerical regime. The United states could work with groups like the Iraq-based National council of resistance of Iran (NCRI) and its military wing, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MeK), helping the thousands of its members who, under Saddam Husayn’s regime, were armed and had conducted guerrilla and terrorist operations against the clerical regime. although the NCRI is supposedly disarmed today, that could quickly be changed.

Brookings policymakers admitted throughout the report that MEK was responsible for killing both American and Iranian military personnel, politicians, and civilians in what was clear-cut terrorism. Despite this, and admissions that MEK remained indisputably a terrorist organization, recommendations were made to de-list it from the US State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization registry so that more overt support could be provided to the group for armed regime change.

Based on such recommendations and intensive lobbying, the US State Department would eventually de-list MEK in 2012 and the group would receive significant backing from the US openly. This included support from many members of current US President Donald Trump’s campaign team – including Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, and John Bolton.

However, despite these efforts, MEK was not capable then or now of accomplishing the lofty goal of instigating full-fledged insurrection against Tehran, necessitating the use of other armed groups. The 2009 Brookings paper made mention of other candidates under a section titled, “Potential Ethnic Proxies,” identifying Arab and Kurdish groups as well as possible candidates for a US proxy war against Tehran.

Under a section titled, “Finding a Conduit and Safe Haven,” Brookings notes:

Of equal importance (and potential difficulty) will be finding a neighboring country willing to serve as the conduit for U.S. aid to the insurgent group, as well as to provide a safe haven where the group can train, plan, organize, heal, and resupply.

For the US proxy war on Syria, Turkey and Jordan fulfill this role. For Iran, it is clear that US efforts would have to focus on establishing conduits and safe havens from Pakistan’s southwest Balochistan province and from Kurdish-dominated regions in northern Iraq, eastern Syria, and southeastern Turkey – precisely where current upheaval is being fueled by US intervention both overtly and covertly.

Brookings noted in 2009 that:

It would be difficult to find or build an insurgency with a high likelihood of success. The existing candidates are weak and divided, and the Iranian regime is very strong relative to the potential internal and external challengers.

A group not mentioned by Brookings in 2009, but that exists in the very region the US seeks to create a conduit and safe haven for a proxy war with Iran, is the Islamic State. Despite claims that it is an independent terrorist organization propelled by black market oil sales, ransoms, and local taxes, its fighting capacity, logistical networks, and operational reach demonstrates vast state sponsorship.

The Ultimate Proxy, the Perfect Conduit and Safe Haven

The Islamic State reaching into Iran, southern Russia, and even as far as western China was not only possible, it was inevitable and the logical progression of US policy as stated by Brookings in 2009 and verifiably executed since then.

The Islamic State represents the perfect “proxy,” occupying the ideal conduit and safe haven for executing America’s proxy war against Iran and beyond. Surrounding the Islamic State’s holdings are US military bases, including those illegally constructed in eastern Syria. Were the US to wage war against Iran in the near future, it is likely these assets would all “coincidentally” coordinate against Tehran just as they are now being “coincidentally” coordinated against Damascus.

The use of terrorism, extremists, and proxies in executing US foreign policy, and the use of extremists observing the Islamic State and Al Qaeda’s brand of indoctrination was demonstrated definitively during the 1980’s when the US with the assistance of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – used Al Qaeda to expel Soviet forces from Afghanistan. This example is in fact mentioned explicitly by Brookings policymakers as a template for creating a new proxy war – this time against Iran.

For the US, there is no better stand-in for Al Qaeda than its successor the Islamic State. US policymakers have demonstrated a desire to use known terrorist organizations to wage proxy war against targeted nation-states, has previously done so in Afghanistan, and has clearly organized the geopolitical game board on all sides of Iran to facilitate its agenda laid out in 2009. With terrorists now killing people in Tehran, it is simply verification that this agenda is advancing onward.

Iran’s involvement in the Syrian conflict illustrates that Tehran is well aware of this conspiracy and is actively defending against it both within and beyond its borders. Russia is likewise an ultimate target of the proxy war in Syria and is likewise involved in resolving it in favor of stopping it there before it goes further.

China’s small but expanding role in the conflict is linked directly to the inevitability of this instability spreading to its western Xianjiang province.

While terrorism in Europe, including the recent London attack, is held up as proof that the West is “also” being targeted by the Islamic State, evidence suggests otherwise. The attacks are more likely an exercise in producing plausible deniability.

In reality, the Islamic State – like Al Qaeda before it – depends on vast, multinational state sponsorship – state sponsorship the US, Europe, and its regional allies in the Persian Gulf are providing. It is also sponsorship they can – at anytime of their choosing – expose and end. They simply choose not to in pursuit of regional and global hegemony.

The 2009 Brookings paper is a signed and dated confession of the West’s proclivity toward using terrorism as a geopolitical tool. While Western headlines insist that nations like Iran, Russia, and China jeopardize global stability, it is clear that they themselves do so in pursuit of global hegemony.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

%d bloggers like this: