US Predictably Turns “Iran Deal” into Confrontation

March 2, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci – NEO) – The so-called “Iran Deal” was never meant to serve as a starting point for rapprochement between Washington and Tehran,  but rather as a pretext for greater confrontation.

US President Donald Trump’s administration capitalized on developments in Saudi Arabia’s losing war in Yemen, as well as a missile test conducted by the Iranian government, to portray Iran as ungrateful for a diplomatic deal the administration’s now resigned National Security Adviser Michael Flynn suggested should never have been made in the first place.

The Guardian’s article, “Trump administration ‘officially putting Iran on notice’, says Michael Flynn,” would state:

The Trump administration has said it was “officially putting Iran on notice” in reaction to an Iranian missile test and an attack on a Saudi warship by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen but gave no details about how Washington intended to respond.

And while Flynn’s comments before his abrupt resignation sound like the genuine, if not hypocritical stance of Trump presidency, those who have followed the actual brokers of US foreign policy recognize the very familiar script Flynn is reading from – and it is a script written not by the Trump administration, but by unelected corporate-financier funded policy think tanks, years before “President Trump” took office.

Flynn’s resignation will have little impact on this policy, since it has been planned, and systematically implemented years before Donald Trump even began his presidential campaign. The fact that Flynn’s stance on Iran is reflected by those remaining in Trump’s administration is proof enough of this.

Brookings’ “Superb Offer” Circa 2009  

The Brookings Institution paper titled, “The Path to Persia: Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran” (.pdf), would explicitly lay out America’s regime change conspiracy arrayed against Tehran, stating (emphasis added):

...any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context—both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.

Brookings’ “superb offer” was clearly presented to both the public and Tehran in the form of the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or the “Iran Deal” in 2015. And while Washington attempted to convince the world it sought rapprochement with Tehran, even as it pursued this deal, it poured money, weapons, and even direct military support into the attempted overthrow of Iran’s ally, Syria – another prerequisite enumerated by the 2009 Brookings report ahead of war with Iran.
The deal then, was disingenuous from its inception, its betrayal all but inevitable when Washington felt the political and strategic climate was optimal for portraying Tehran as duplicitous, and justifying a wider confrontation – particularly with both Syria significantly weakened after 6 years of war, and Iran significantly tied up financially and militarily in Syria’s fate.

Trump Battered Saudi Arabia on the Campaign Trail, Defends it on the War Path 
Rhetoric emanating from Trump while campaigning in 2016 for the presidency, heavily revolved around fighting terrorism, and tough-talk with Saudi Arabia. In one infamous message over social media platform Twitter, Trump would proclaim:

Dopey Prince @Alwaleed_Talal wants to control our U.S. politicians with daddy’s money. Can’t do it when I get elected. #Trump2016 

Now as president, Trump’s stance regards Saudi Arabia as a friend, and is implying wider confrontation with Iran for allegedly arming and training fighters in Yemen who attacked a Saudi warship. The Trump administration and the media at large fail to mention that Saudi Arabia has – for years – been waging full-scale war on Yemen, by air, land, and sea – both directly, and through terrorist proxies – from Saudi territory and international waters, and within and above Yemeni territory itself via land invasion and airstrikes.

The prospect of the US reversing diplomatic rapprochement with Iran over Yemeni forces fighting against Saudi Arabia’s extraterritorial military aggression against their nation alone transgresses both international law and the interests of the American people.

However, considering Saudi Arabia’s admitted ties to terrorism in Yemen, across the region – particularly in Syria and Iraq in the form of Al Qaeda, its various affiliates, and the so-called Islamic State (ISIS) itself – and around the world, the US declaring Saudi Arabia a “friend and ally” and accusing Iran of “destabilizing behavior across the Middle East,” makes it clear that the US either condones Saudi Arabia’s state sponsorship of terrorism, or is directly involved in it itself.

Of course, Flynn, previously the director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), was aware of the DIA’s 2012 memo in which the creation of a “Salafist” (Islamic) “principality” (State) was sought after by not only the Persian Gulf monarchies, but also NATO-member Turkey, Europe, and the US itself. So was the rest of the Trump administration.

The memo read:

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

The DIA memo then explains exactly who this “Salafist principality’s” supporters are (and who its true enemies are):

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

Iran is specifically stated as opposed to “the opposition” which included the then nascent Islamic State, as well as designated terrorist organization Jabhat Al Nusra (now Jabhat Fateh al-Sham).

In a display of surreal deception, the Trump administration attempts to portray themselves as “fighting terror” while edging closer to confrontation with Iran currently fighting it region-wide. The US does this in defense of Saudi Arabia, admitted by the US itself as sponsoring terrorism region-wide.

President Trump’s hypocrisy defies explanation unless the Brookings Institution paper is brought back to light, and current events put into the context of the conspiracy and continuity of agenda the paper represents.

The US media has attempted to portray President Trump’s hypocrisy toward Saudi Arabia as a personal and business-related conflict of interest. The US media apparently expects the public to believe it is just a coincidence the Trump administration is continuing decades of US foreign policy and a truly duplicitous relationship with Riyadh that has transcended multiple presidencies, left and right, Republican and Democrat, including the recently departed Obama administration.

To understand the geopolitical trajectory of global events, particularly in regards to US-Iranian relations, observers, analysts, and the general public alike would serve themselves well to read US policy papers instead of entertaining theories from the US media, or speeches and statements from the Trump administration.

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

Syria: Undeclared US-NATO War of Aggression, Using Al Qaeda Terrorism as An Instrument of Death and Destruction

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, January 28, 2017
Isis-financé-par-les-USA

The following eight concepts are intended to clarify the nature of the war on Syria. 

It was never “a civil war”. It was an undeclared  war of aggression using Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists as the foot-soldiers of US-NATO and their Middle East allies.  

From day one, terrorists were involved in the killing of civilians. 

It started in Daraa as an insurgency integrated by Salafist mercenaries. 

Most of what is presented below is backed up by mainstream and official sources of information.  

1. The Daraa “Protest Movement” on March 17-18 2011

Daraa is a small border town.  National protest movements are invariably initiated in large urban areas.

The Daraa “Protests” had all the appearances of a staged event involving covert support to “Islamic terrorists”.

Government sources pointed to the role of radical Salafist groups.  In chorus, the Western media described the events in Daraa as a protest movement against Bashar Al Assad. Tacitly acknowledged by the media, many of the alleged “demonstrators” were professional killers.

In a bitter irony, the deaths of policemen were higher than those of “demonstrators”. It was not a protest movement, it was an armed insurgency.

In Daraa, roof top snipers were targeting both police and protesters  

Reading between the lines of Israeli and Lebanese news reports (which acknowledge the police deaths) a clearer picture of what happened in Daraa on March 17-18 had emerged. The Israel National News Report (which can not be accused of being biased in favor of Bashar al Assad) confirmed that:

“Seven police officers and at least four demonstrators in Syria have been killed in continuing violent clashes that erupted in the southern town of Daraa last Thursday. … and the Baath Party Headquarters and courthouse were torched, in renewed violence on Sunday. (Gavriel Queenann, Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protests, Israel National News, Arutz Sheva, March 21, 2011, emphasis added)

The Lebanese news report also acknowledged the killings of seven policemen in Daraa.

[They were killed] “during clashes between the security forces and protesters… They got killed trying to drive away protesters during demonstration in Dara’a” 

The Lebanese Ya Libnan report quoting Al Jazeera also acknowledged that protesters had “burned the headquarters of the Baath Party and the court house in Dara’a” (emphasis added)

These news reports of the events in Daraa confirmed that from the very outset this was not a “peaceful protest” as claimed by the Western media.

Moreover, from an assessment of the initial casualty figures (Israel News), there were more policemen than “demonstrators” who were killed.

This is significant because it suggests that the police force may have initially been outnumbered by a well organized armed gang of professional killers.

2. Recruitment and Training of Terrorists From the Very Outset in 2011

From Day One, the Islamist “freedom fighters” were supported, trained and equipped by NATO and Turkey’s High Command. According to Israeli intelligence sources:

NATO headquarters in Brussels and the Turkish high command are meanwhile drawing up plans for their first military step in Syria, which is to arm the rebels with weapons for combating the tanks and helicopters spearheading the Assad regime’s crackdown on dissent. … NATO strategists are thinking more in terms of pouring large quantities of anti-tank and anti-air rockets, mortars and heavy machine guns into the protest centers for beating back the government armored forces. (DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011)

This initiative, which was also supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, involved a process of organized recruitment of thousands of jihadist “freedom fighters”, reminiscent of  the enlistment of  Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war:

Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (Ibid, emphasis added)

These mercenaries were subsequently integrated into US and allied sponsored terrorist organizations including Al Nusrah and ISIS.

3. June 2014. The Staged ISIS “Invasion” of Iraq

The Islamic State is protected by the US and its allies.

If they had wanted to eliminate the Islamic State brigades, they could have “carpet” bombed their convoys of Toyota pickup trucks when they crossed the desert from Syria into Iraq in June 2014.

\

The  Syro-Arabian Desert is open territory (see map below). With state of the art jet fighter aircraft (F15, F22 Raptor, CF-18) it would have been  -from a military standpoint-  a rapid and expedient surgical operation  

But the objective was not to eliminate them, the objective was to support them.

4. September 2014. Obama’s “Counter-Terrorism Campaign”. US-NATO and Coalition “Humanitarian” Airstrikes “Directed against ISIS”

In September 2014, Obama ordered a “counter-terrorism” bombing campaign against the ISIS in both Syria and Iraq.  This major bombing campaign was initiated two months months after the entry of the ISIS convoy of Toyota pickup trucks into Iraq in June 2014. The bombing campaign has now entered into its third year. Its objective was NOT to go after the Islamic State (ISIS-Daesh). The coalition consisted of some 4o countries five allied Arab monarchies, which are known to provide support to both ISIS and al Qaeda.  The “40-nation coalition that unleashed more than 200 airstrikes in Syria on a single night with state-of-the-art U.S. fighter planes and help from five allied Arab monarchies” Among the advanced weapons system allegedly used against the ISIS was the F-22 Raptor.

The total number of US and coalition sorties against Syria and Iraq is of the order of 111,410. This translates into an average of 147 sorties a day (over a period of 755 days).

  • More than 8,300 strike sorties have been carried out against Syria according to US Department of Defense sources.
  • The non-strike sorties have been used for the purposes of reconnaissance, logistics and coordination with terrorist commandos on the ground. 
  • 31,900 targets in Syria and Iraq have been hit by US war planes (see table below) including public buildings, residential areas, economic infrastructure (all of which was waged under a fake campaign against ISIS- Daesh).

Over a two year period (September 2014- September 2016)

Its all for a good cause. None of these strikes were directed at the Syrian people, according to official statements.

And these humanitarian statements have never been challenged by the Western media.

The initiative was part of the “Global War on Terrorism”. It was in violation of  international law. What we are dealing with are extensive war crimes directed against the people of Syria and Iraq. 

5. 2014-2016: 31,900 “Targets Damaged/Destroyed” by US and Coalition Air Raids

Source of Tables US Department of Defense, copyright US DoD, 2016

6. The Cost of Obama’s Air Campaign: 9.3 billion dollars 

755 days, 12.3 million dollars a day since August 2014

These are the costs of destroying Iraq and Syria. killing tens of thousands of Syrians, triggering a refugee crisis. These costs are ultimately financed by tax dollars. We are dealing with the conduct of extensive war crimes. The mainstream media remains on silent this issue. 

These 12.3 million dollars a day are the cost of destroying Syria and Iraq and killing their people.

In the table above the “official” breakdown is provided, the figures refer to US strikes against Syria and Iraq.

31,900 targets as part of a war on terrorism. Ironically, the number of terrorists has increased dramatically as a result of the “counter-terrorism” campaign, not to mention the NATO sponsored international campaign of recruitment of terrorists.

7. U.S. Weapons to Al Qaeda and ISIS 

According to Jane’s Defence Weekly, quoting documents released by the U.S. Government’s Federal Business Opportunities (FBO), the US –as part of its “counterterrorism campaign”– has provided Syrian rebels [aka moderate Al Qaeda] with large amounts of weapons and ammunition.

The US and its allies (including Turkey and Saudi Arabia) have relied on the illicit trade in light weaponry produced in Eastern Europe, the Balkans, China, etc. for delivery to rebel groups inside Syria, including ISIS-Daesh and Al Nusra. In turn, operating out of the occupied Golan Heights, Israel’s IDF has provided weapons, ammunition, logistical support to Al Qaeda rebels operating in Southern Syria.

While Washington’s Middle East allies undertake shady transactions in a buoyant market for light weapons, a significant part of these illicit weapons shipments is nonetheless directly commissioned by the US government.

These shipments of weapons are not conducted through internationally approved weapons transfers. While they are the result of  a Pentagon (or US government) procurement, they are not recorded as “official” military aid. They use private traders and shipping companies within the realm of a thriving illicit trade in light weapons.

Based on the examination of a single December 2015 Pentagon sponsored shipment of more than 990 tons, one can reasonably conclude that the amounts of light weapons in the hands of  ”opposition” rebels inside Syria is substantial and exceedingly large.

Screenshot from Jane’s Defense Report

For further details click here

8. Weapons “Made in Canada” Delivered to Saudi Arabia, A State Sponsor of Terrorism  

Ottawa’s deal with Saudi Arabia is coordinated with Washington. It essentially serves the Pentagon’s military agenda in the Middle East, it channels billions of dollars to the US military industrial complex.

Amply documented, Saudi Arabia is the state sponsor of Al Qaeda affiliated “opposition groups” in Syria including the Islamic State (ISIS). Riyadh –acting in liaison and on behalf of Washington– plays a central role in the financing of the Islamic State (ISIS) as well as the recruitment, training and religious indoctrination of terrorist mercenary forces deployed in Syria and Iraq.

What this signifies is that Canada is selling weapons to a country which is supporting and sponsoring terrorist organizations.  Moreover Saudi Arabia is currently involved in a war of aggression against Yemen in blatant derogation of international law.

The weapons are “Made in Canada” produced by General Dynamics Land Systems, London, Ontario., a subsidiary of US defense contractor General Dynamics.

General Dynamics has subsidiaries in 43 countries including Canada.

Ottawa’s official stance is that these weapons which include “combat vehicles with machine guns and anti-tank cannons” are to be used by Saudi Arabia solely for purposes of national defense. They are not be used against civilians.

Opponents of Canada’s $15-billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia took Ottawa to court. The action was led by law Professor Daniel Turp together with students of the University of Montreal. In a recent judgment (January 23) by Federal Court in Montreal, the case was dismissed: “Justice Daniele Tremblay-Lamer ruled that the court’s role was not to “pass moral judgment” on the decision by then-foreign affairs minister Stéphane Dion to issue export permits allowing the deal.”

9. The Liberation of Aleppo

While Aleppo has been liberated against the scourge of US-NATO supported terrorism, most mainstream media are accusing Syrian government forces of committing atrocities against civilians, describing Aleppo as a humanitarian crisis. What they fail to mention is that for the last four years the Eastern part of  Aleppo has been occupied by Al Qaeda terrorists who are now upheld as “opposition” rebels.

The terrorists are described as the victims of Syrian government aggression. From the very outset, the atrocities committed by the terrorists are casually blamed on Syrian government forces and their allies.

 

حفل استقبال ناري يليق بالجيش التركي يعده الجيش السوري والحلفاء .. والدعوة عامة

بقلم نارام سرجون

سأتهم كل من يدعي أنه لا يعرف تفسيرا للحركات البهلواينة الاميركية والتركية في شمال العراق وسورية بأنه ليس ساذجا بل متساذج ويريد أن يأكل حلاوة بعقولنا ..

 فما يحدث من الموصل وحتى الباب هو معركة حلب الكبرى حيث يقعقع السلاح ونسمع صرير سلاسل الدبابات وصرير أسنان المسؤولين العسكريين الأتراك والأميركيين وهم يدفعون لمغادرة حلب بالقوة .. والرسالة الاميركية التركية هي فرملة اندفاع الجيش السوري وحلفائه وتهدئتهم فقط حتى انقشاع غبار الانتخابات الاميركية التي ينتظر فيها الاسلاميون هيلاري كلينتون “مرشحة الاسلام السني” ضد ترامب مرشح “الاسلام الشيعي” .. لأن كلينتون حسب أدبيات وفلسفات وحسابات السياسة لدى التيارات الاسلامية العميلة تريد الحفاظ على القاعدة في غلافها الجديد (جبهة النصرة) كرأس حربة الاسلام السني ضد المشروع الصفوي .. فيما لا يريد ترامب أن يستمر في حرب سورية ولايكترث لاسقاط النظام الذي هو في منظور الاسلام السياسي الوهابي رأس الهلال الشيعي ويجب تدميره .. وتحولت الحولة الانتخابية الاميركية في المناقشات العربية الى مرشحة للسنة ومرشح للشيعة !! ..

في الشمالين السوري والعراقي تصالح الأمريكان والأتراك بسرعة واختفت المؤامرة على أردوغان بعد أن قيل أن الأتراك تخاصموا مع الامريكان بسبب ماقيل انه محاولة انقلاب تورط فيها الأمريكان وحاولوا فيها اغتيال زعيم الاسلام أردوغان بقصف الفندق الذي كان يقيم فيه .. ولكن ان صح هذا فان هذا سيكون أقصر خلاف سياسي في التاريخ بين متآمر ومتآمر عليه .. ولم يدم أكثر من ثلاثة ايام بين طرفين كان أحدهما يقال أنه أراد قصف أردوغان في الفندق الذي يستريح فيه .. هذا الزعل الخاطف والرضا السريع بين المتآمرين الأمريكان المغضوب عليهم تركيا وبين المتآمر عليهم لاشك أنه يطرح سؤالا وجيها ان كانت المسرحية الانقلابية كالعادة في تركيا تمثيلية قدم الأمريكان كل أسرارها هدية لأردوغان من أجل افشالها لتحطيم بؤر الرفض والمعارضة التي كانت تتنامى في وجه المشروع الاسلامي التركي على غرار الرفض الشعبي المصري الذي أطاح بالاخوان المسلمين .. لأن عملية اجتثاث الانقلاب كان غريبة وامتدت الى كل مفاصل وأعماق المجتمع التركي ووصلت الى عظامه واندست أصابع الاسلاميين حتى في مؤخرات الأتراك وأعضائهم الحميمة بحثا عن المؤامرة .. وجردتهم من قوى وبؤر الرفض المدني والعلماني .. وهذا التناغم بين الامريكان والاتراك لايمكن تفسيره على أنه اتفاق مصالح .. فكيف يكون اتفاق مصالح بين طرفين كاد احدهما ان يدمر الآخر بانقلاب ثم يعودان حتى قبل اجراءات بناء ثقة؟؟ .. بل ان الادعاء أن خشية تركيا من الحزام الكردي هو سبب التقارب لأن اميريكا قدمت الأكراد على مذبح العلاقة مع اردوغان وكانوا قرابين هذه المصالحة يبدو ادعاء تضليليا .. لأن من يحل موضوع الأكراد لتركيا هو السوريون والروس وليس أميريكا على أساس ان الدولة السورية مع الروس قادرة على التحرك بحرية أكثر في الحزام الكردي لأنها في أراضيها لمنع تمدده دون حاجة تركيا للتورط وارسال جيشها الى أرض معادية ..

بل اتهمت مصادر غربية الأكراد أنهم كانوا في منتهى السذاجة وقدمتهم اميريكا مجانا لتركيا حيث أوعزت لهم في لحظة حساسة جدا ودون مبرر ان يسرعوا متعجلين دون تفكير لاعلان التحرك لاقامة كانتون خاص بهم شمال سورية .. وكان التوقيت غريبا جدا بعد أن بدا أن الامريكان والاتراك مختلفون وسيمر الأكراج من شقوق الخلاف ويتسربون الى دولتهم كالماء في شقوق الصخر .. وهنا وقع الأكراد في الفخ حيث خرجوا من مكمنهم دون أي مبرر وتوقيت مقنع ليجدوا أن أردوغان كان بانتظارهم عسكريا .. وتبين ان الامريكان استعملوا الأكراد ودفعوهم للتمرد على الدولة السورية في لحظة دقيقة وأقنعوهم أنهم مع الأكراد يتشاركون العداء مع سورية ومع اردوغان ووعدوهم انهم سيساعدونهم في الشمال السوري نكاية بحزب العدالة والتنمية .. فابتلع الاكراد الطعم ويقال ان صالح مسلم لم يبتلع الطعم بل ساهم في اعداده عن اطلاع وسابق اصرار وترصد لأنه قبض ثمنا سياسيا لهذه الحركة الكردية سيظهر لاحقا .. لأنه باسهامه بنصب الفخ للأكراد سيساعد تركيا في التسلل الى الشمال السوري دون اغضاب روسيا وبتحييد دمشق وطهران وهما تريانه يساعدهما عن غير قصد في اعادة التمرد الكردي الى مكامنه ..

وهاهو مخطط اردوغان واميركيا يتبين .. فالتحرك التركي جاء لأنه هناك حسابات أن معركة حلب لامناص من خسارتها لأن التحضيرات النارية والعسكرية الروسية والسورية وحلفائهما غير مسبوقة .. ولايمكن أن يتجاوز احتمال كسبها من قبل القاعدة والنصرة أكثر من 0% .. ولكن هناك طريقة غير مباشرة لمنعها بتهديد الجيش السوري بالاقتراب التركي من مدينة الباب .. ويصبح ظهر الجيش السوري الذي يحاصر حلب محاصرا .. ويمكن للنصرة التي تلبس ثياب الجيش الحر أن تشن هجمات عنيفة على ظهر الجيش السوري المكشوف .. وتمنعه من التحرك نحو الأحياء الشرقية ونحو ادلب ..

وقد سمعت من بعض المتابعين العليمين والراسخين في العلم السياسي أن السوريين وحلفاءهم كانوا يتابعون التحرك التركي ضد الأكراد وكانوا أمام خيارين وهما: اما أن يتركوا صالح مسلم يستولي على الشمال بايعاز أمريكي وهناك احتمال أن يصمت أردوغان بالتنسيق مع الامريكان لأنهم سيجدون في المشكلة الكردية عبئا اضافيا على الدولة السورية حيث سنجد انفسنا كسوريين في مواجهة مع أمر واقع وهو اننا نواجه كتلة عسكرية وديموغرافية اضافية مشتقة من مكون سوري كردي بحيث أن اي صدام للجيش السوري معها سيتم استغلاله للتحريض على الجيش الذي سيصور على أنه يقتل الأكراد هذه المرة بعد أن قتل أهل السنة والجماعة ونضيف عدوا لانريد معاداته .. ولكن أي تجاهل للحركة الكردية سيؤسس لأمر واقع وحركة تطهير عرقي تعمل عليها أميريكا سيتدفق من خلالها الأميريكيون والاسرائيليون لاحقا ولو عبر جمعيات أممية وانسانية وقرارات دولية ويضربون الوجود السوري في الشمال مع حبسها ضمن الحدود السورية .. وأما الخيار الثاني فهو أن يترك أردوغان يدخل وتفتح له الطريق عبر تسجيل اعتراض سياسي دون اعتراض عسكري .. ولكن هذا الوقت كاف لوضعه هو في مواجهة الدعاية التي يروج لها بنفسه وهي أنه جاء لتحطيم الاكراد .. وعندما يدخل الفخ الذي كان ينصبه لنا .. سيتم استقباله بما يليق به .. وسيضرب ضرب غرائب الابل وتملأ دماوه الأرض من غرب الفرات الى شرقه ..

هذه أول مرة أعتقد أن علينا أن نشكر مجرما كبيرا مثل رجب اردوغان .. ليس لأنه يفتك بكرامة الجيش التركي ويذله .. وليس لأنه يفكك ويذيب منظومة الجمهورية التركية بمحاليل الاسلاميين وشعاراتهم التي جعلت المجتمع التركي مجتمعات متعددة فدرالية قبل التشقق .. فهناك مجتمعات اسلامية ومجتمعات علمانية وهناك مجتمعات قومية تركية ومجتمعات عربية ومجتمعات كردية ومجتمعات سنية ومجتمعات علوية .. الخ .. وتركيا لن تعود كسابق عهدها لأنها بركة من البنزين الذي تسرب من خزانات الجمهورية التي حبست فيها منذ أيام أتاتورك وجاء الاسلاميون وفتحوها في وقت شبت فيه نيران كثيرة حول تركيا دينية ومذهبية وعرقية .. وكما يقول الأعراب ان الحليب لايعود الى الضروع بعد أن تحلب ..وهذا البنزين الذي حلبه العثمانيون من ضروع المجتمع التركي الشرقي لن يعود قبل عدة عقود .. ستتكفل النيران القريبة بتفتيت تركيا عندما يرمي أحدهم قطعة من نار عليها اذا آن الأوان ..

الشكر الكبير لأردوغان في الحقيقة لأنه خاض في المستنقع الذي رفضت اي قوة في العالم أن تخوض فيه بنفسها وهو الدخول الى أرض ليست لك .. فحتى روسيا فضلت التدخل في سورية “من فوق” .. حيث السماء .. لاالارض .. وأميريكا سحبت جيشها من العراق بعد درس قاس ولن تكرر الخطيئة على الاطلاق وبدا هذا في ترددها في دخول أي من أراضي الربيع العربي حتى بذريعة السلاح الكيماوي .. أما أردوغان فانه دخل الفخ برجليه وهو يظن أنه يضرب العصافير ويجمعها بيديه .. فهو يضرب الأكراد ويبعدهم عنه ويدفع في نفس الوقت بالمنطقة الآمنة .. ويتسلل الى سورية ويناور في حلب ويتسرب الى الموصل .. ويرسل الجيش العلماني الذي قد ينقلب عليه مجددا لينشغل في الحروب على الحدود ..

الهدية الثمينة التي قدمها لنا اردوغان هو أنه دخل وخرج من أرض الناتو ودخل أرضنا وصار في مرمى النيران بعد أن دخل برجليه .. وكلنا كنا نعلم أنه سيدخل من ثغرة الخطر الكردي عليه ولذلك خفضنا صوتنا حتى ارتفع صوته كثيرا وصار يظن أنه معصوم عن العقاب .. الا أننا الآن نستطيع أن نؤكد أن حفل الاستقبال لجيشه في بدأ .. وقد أعلن ناطق باسم قوات الحلفاء في سورية أن الاقتراب منها أكثر صار خطرا جدا وأن هناك من يتهيأ للفتك بجنود أردوغان عبر عمليات غوريللا ومقاومة شعبية قاسية للغاية اذا خرج عن اطار اللعبة التي قيست له بالميلمتر المربع .. لايستطيع الجيش التركي ان يحول دونها لأنه في أرض مكتظة بالعدو .. العدو العربي المحلي والعدو الكردي المحلي الذي لم تتمكن خطة صالح مسلم من تحويله الى خصم للدولة السورية وهو يرى أن من قتله هو الدولة التركية عدوة الدولة السورية .. وعدو تركيا القاتلة أقرب الى الصديق ..

اردوغان لايستطيع أن يحميه غطاء الناتو من حركة المقاومة الشرسة التي قد تطلق ضده لأن خبراء حرب العصابات السوريون والايرانيون عجز عنهم الاميركيون في العراق .. وهو لن لن يحميه غطاء الناتو الذي ثرثر وجعل يسمعنا أنه يؤيده لأن الناتو ببساطة لايريد حربا مع روسيا وصواريخها التي ستذل السلاح الجوي الأطلسي .. بل يريد من اردوغان أن يدخل بهذا الضجيج والتحضير للمنطقة الآمنة (بتأييد مرتقب من الناتو) الى ظهر حلب ويفلت عصاباته من هناك التي انتقلت معه من ادلب الى تلك المناطق لمنع تحريك الجيش السوري الذي يحضر لدخول أحياء حلب الشرقية وييبد جبهة النصرة ولن يخرج من تلك الأحياء مقاتلون أحياء للنصرة (وهم بالآلاف) وهذا ماسيقصم ظهر جبهة النصرة في الشمال السوري .. ومن يتابع التحركات واللقاءات لابد لفت نظره الاجتماع الديبلومسي الثلاثي الروسي الايراني السوري في موسكو والذي يراه متابعون كثر أنه سيكون لتوقيت اعلان انطلاقة معركة حلب بناء على توصيات العسكريين الذين قدموا تصوراتهم ومواعيدهم كما طلبت الديبلوماسيات الثلاث لاعلان ساعة الصفر ..

الروس الذين سمعوا بتصريحات الأمريكان والاتراك ولاحظوا بعض التحركات القريبة من الأجواء السورية أظهروا كل البأس والتحدي في تحريك قطع البحر نحو السواحل السورية وهي منظومات تحد وردع .. وكلها تقول ان الجيش السوري وحلفاءه يعزفون لحن النهاية في سمفونية معركة حلب .. كما أن وجود أميريكا وتركيا في حلب يعزف لحن الخاتمة ..

انتم مدعوون جميعا لمشاهدة عرض لايقوّت وحفل استقبال الجيش التركي في شمال سورية بل والاشتراك فيه .. حفل عظيم لن ينساه الأتراك على الأطلاق .. لأن اذلال الجيش التركي بدأه اردوغان في شوارع استانبول وسيكمله في الشمال السوري على أرض العدو .. وليرينا أردوغان رجولته ..

وأنتم أيضا مدعوون جميعا الى حفل يعزف فيه الجيش السوري وحلفاؤه سيمفونية النهاية في معركة حلب بالرصاص والصواريخ والدبابات والوحدات الخاصة وكل أنواع السوخوي .. المعركة التي أتمنى أن تقدم هدية للرئيس الاميركي القادم في يومه الأول .. هدية متواضعة موقعة باسم الجيش العربي السوري .. وحلفائه .. وبقية الألحان السورية والقدود الحلبية تأتي تباعا .. سواء للمرشحة السنية أم للمرشح الشيعي في الانتخابات الرئاسية الأمريكية .. هدية من سورية التي ستسقط شعارات المرشحة السنية والمرشح الشيعي في الانتخابات الامريكية .. ليبقى في الشرق فقط المشروع الوطني الشامل .. والهوية الواحدة .. والشعب الواحد .. والاسلام الواحد .. والعدو الواحد .. اسرائيل ..

Brussels Attacks: How Saudi Arabia’s Influence.. Sowed Seeds of Radicalism in Belgium

Leo Cendrowicz- The Independent

There are many reasons why Belgium has become a hotbed of “radical Islamism”. Some of the answers may lie in the implanting of Saudi Salafist preachers in the country from the 1960s.

Brussels attacks


Keen to secure oil contracts, Belgium’s King Baudouin made an offer to Saudi King Faisal, who had visited Brussels in 1967: Belgium would set up a mosque in the capital, and hire Gulf-trained clerics.

At the time, Belgium was encouraging Moroccan and Turkish workers to come into the country as cheap labor. The deal between the two Kings would make the mosque their main place of worship.

Brussels already had the perfect place. An oriental pavilion designed by Belgian architect Ernest Van Humbeek had been built in the capital’s Cinquantenaire park in 1879, but was falling into disuse. The 1967 deal gave the Saudis a 99-year, rent-free lease. The pavilion was refashioned by the Saudis, opening in 1978 as the Great Mosque of Brussels, as well as the seat of the Islamic and Cultural Centre of Belgium [ICC].Although the mosque was treated as the official voice of Muslims in Belgium, its extremist teachings came from a very different tradition to the Islam of the new immigrants. Today, there are around 600,000 people of Moroccan and Turkish origin in Belgium, a country of 11 million.

“The Moroccan community comes from mountainous regions and rift valleys, not the desert. They come from the Maliki school of Islam, and are a lot more tolerant and open than the Muslims from other regions like Saudi Arabia,” says George Dallemagne, a Belgian member of parliament for the centre-right CDH, an opposition party. “However, many of them were re-“Islamified” by the Salafist clerics and teachers from the Great Mosque. Some Moroccans were even given scholarships to study in Medina, in Saudi Arabia.”

Dallemagne says the Salafist clerics have tried to undermine attempts by Moroccan immigrants to integrate into Belgium. “We like to think Saudi Arabia is an ally and friend, but the Saudis are always engaged in double-talk: they want an alliance with the West when it comes to fighting Shias in Iran, but nonetheless have a conquering ideology when it comes to their religion in the rest of the world,” he said.

Dallemagne has sponsored many resolutions in the Belgian parliament aimed at loosening ties with Saudi Arabia, and reducing the Salafist influence in Belgium. “We can’t have a dialogue with countries that want to destabilize us,” he says. “The problem is that it is only recently that authorities are finally opening their eyes to this.”

The mosque has sought to send a strong message opposing the latest attacks, with Mohamed Ndiaye, one of the center’s imams, releasing a statement in the aftermath: “We would like to express our deep sorrow over the Paris attacks. Our thoughts are with the people of Paris and the victims’ families.”

But the mosque remains a concern for the Belgian government: in August, a WikiLeaks cable revealed that a staff member of the Saudi embassy in Belgium was expelled years ago over his active role in spreading the extreme so-called Takfiri dogma.

The cable – between the Saudi King and his Home Minister – referred to Belgian demands that the ICC’s Saudi director, Khalid Alabri, should leave the country, saying that his messages were far too extreme, and that his status as director meant he should not be preaching anyway.

 

Five Years of the Syrian Saga

Five Years of the Syrian Saga

Five Years of the Syrian Saga

March 15 marked the fifth anniversary of the beginning of the spring 2011 unrest in Syria, which snowballed into a civil war and foreign intervention.

On that day, 15 March 2011, police arrested several teenagers in the city of Daraa for painting anti-government slogans on the walls. A few days later, it became known that some of those detained had died as a result of torture in prison. The news galvanised the populations of Daraa and other cities and there were large-scale anti-government demonstrations across the country, intensified by the interference of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the West in Syria’s affairs…

External forces skilfully used the conditions for an internal crisis already present in Syria at the beginning of 2011. These included the liberal economic reforms carried out in the early 2000s by Abdullah Dardari, which caused the country enormous harm. The ‘reforms’ increased social inequality and the resulting discontent was compounded by the unlimited power of the Syrian intelligence agencies, of which there were twelve in the country and which began to replace the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party. The situation was complicated by the fact that between 2004 and 2009, Syria suffered a raging drought that saw nearly three million people move from villages to cities. Once there, they were forced to live in slum settlements on the brink of poverty and this was fertile ground for the dissemination of propaganda by Salafi extremists.

In addition, in comparison with Egypt, Yemen and dozens of other Arabic states, Syria was a prosperous country with a burgeoning economy, completely self-sufficient in food production and actively influencing the situation in the Middle East.

This influence is one of the reasons for the hatred that has been heaped onto the country by Syria’s enemies since the start of the crisis. The overwhelming dissatisfaction shown by Washington and its allies in the region, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, led to Syria’s inclusion in the Axis of Resistance, a military and political alliance that includes Tehran, Damascus and the Hezbollah movement in Lebanon. Incidentally, it was this coalition that managed to stop the Israeli aggression in Lebanon in 2006.

The Axis of Resistance prevented Washington from carrying out a neo-colonial redivision of the Middle East. Back in July 2011, the US Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, visited Hama, where he openly interfered in the country’s internal affairs by expressing his support for the opposition groups protesting against the Syrian government.

The regional rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran also played its part. In an effort to weaken the influence of the Islamic Republic, the Saudi royal family decided to overthrow the Syrian regime. In the spring of 2011, during a conversation with the head of former US Vice President Dick Cheney’s administration, the Saudi Foreign Affairs Minister Saud Al Faisal expressed confidence that replacing the regime in Syria would be extremely beneficial to Saudi Arabia: «The king», he stated, «knows that other than the collapse of the Islamic Republic itself, nothing would weaken Iran more than losing Syria.»

Turkey’s role was particularly treacherous with regard to Syria. It should be recalled that relations between Syria and Turkey had improved significantly during Bashar al-Assad’s presidency. A Free Trade Zone agreement was even signed between the two countries.

After the crisis began in Syria, however, Erdogan’s government abruptly changed course and set its sights on replacing the regime in Damascus. In November 2011, a training camp for Syrian militants was opened in the Turkish city of İskenderun.

During the first stage of the conflict (up to the summer of 2013), America left Turkey and Qatar in charge of the ‘Syrian dossier’. In May 2012, a delegation from Qatar visited Damascus and promised to end hostilities against Syria if Bashar al-Assad agreed to give key posts in the country’s government to the Muslim Brotherhood, which is supported by Ankara and Doha. So it was openly suggested to Assad that he hand the country over to external control. When he refused, an undeclared war was unleashed against his country.

Very soon after Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and NATO countries began supplying the Syrian opposition with weapons, Jihadi militants from dozens of countries around the world began to arrive in Syria. The first militants, which at that time made up the backbone of the terrorist group known as the Islamic State, arrived in Syria from Iraq in February 2012 with the knowledge of the CIA…

As a result, by the summer of 2013 radical Islamists had pushed aside the moderate opposition represented by the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and had confidently seized the initiative in the civil war.

The Friends of Syria Group often denounces the Syrian government forces’ bombing and shelling of cities and residential areas. However, the military and political conflict in the country would never have escalated so far if the West and the monarchies of the Persian Gulf had not regularly poured oil on the flames of the civil war. As a result, the leading forces in the anti-government camp are the radical Islamist organisations Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra, which have pushed aside or absorbed any smaller groups. An exception to this is perhaps the pro-Saudi Army of Islam (Jaysh al-Islam).

Let us not be deceived: if the Friends of Syria had managed to overthrow Bashar al-Assad in 2013-2014, control of the country would still not have been passed to the ‘moderates’. The country would have been divided up between various armed groups that would have immediately started to sort out their differences and Syria would have become like a second Libya – a feral, ungoverned territory of chaos.

Against this background, Russia, along with Iran, has shown itself to be a friend to Syria. You will recall that until 2015, Russia had not interfered in the conflict and had not supplied Bashar al-Assad with weapons. In addition, Moscow was firmly opposed to any attempts by external forces to decide Syria’s fate while ignoring the will of the Syrian people. Three times Russia vetoed resolutions at the UN Security Council, thwarting attempts by the West to legalise an intervention in Syrian affairs. It is only thanks to Moscow’s position that the United States was unable to repeat the Libyan option in Syria.

Russia’s military intervention in the Syrian conflict, which began in September 2015, is fundamentally different from the intervention by the US and its allies. Only Russia and Iran are in Syria at the official request of the legitimate government of the Syrian Arab Republic.

In five and a half months, the Russian Aerospace Forces have managed to do what the Americans could not (or rather did not want to) do in 18 months: stop the further expansion of the Islamic State and undermine the foundations of its existence. For the non-terrorist armed opposition groups, Russia’s military operation was an example of ‘peace enforcement’, as illustrated by the beginning of the Geneva talks.

The Geneva forum should bring a long-awaited peace to Syria. Naturally, however, the country’s political system will not be the same as it was at the start of the conflict. Syria is facing a substantial renewal of its political elite, but these are issues that will now be determined by the Syrian people rather than Western strategists and sheikhs from the shores of the Persian Gulf.

Sheikh Qassem: Hezbollah Won’t Let Saudi Control Lebanon

Local Editor

Sheikh QassemHezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem said that some Lebanese factions aim at turning Lebanon to be a Saudi province, asserting that the party wants the country to be completely independent.

It is well-known that the former Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal frustrated the Lebanese efforts to conduct the presidential elections because he rejected one of the candidates despite the approval of most of the Lebanese political factions, Sheikh Qassem added.

His eminence noted that Faisal commanded Lebanese MP Saad al-Hariri to refrain from participating in the elections.

In a different context, Sheikh Qassem asserted that certain Lebanese factions criticize Hezbollah military intervention in Syria despite the fact that they supported the terrorist groups in Syria since the inception of the crisis.

“One of the Lebanese MPs moved to Turkey on order to play the role of funding the militant groups in Syria.”

“Those factions provided the terrorists in Syria with weaponry as well, and no one can forget Lotfallah ship which was discovered before they dispatch it to the militant groups.”

“Hezbollah publicly announced his military intervention in Syria, but they used the humanitarian disguise to hide their military support to the terrorist groups, including ISIL and Nusra.”

Locally, his eminence called on all the Lebanese political parties to tackle the socio-economic issues despite the presidential void.

Is it right to deactivate the public institutions because we have failed to elect a new president? Sheikh Qassem.

Sheikh Qassem delivered his remarks in a ceremony organized by Hezbollah to mourn the death of mujahid Dr. Qafiq Mohammad Bajouk

Source: Hezbollah Media Relations

18-02-2016 – 20:58 Last updated 18-02-2016 – 20:58

 

Related Articles

Finding the Islamic State a Safe House

 

February 16, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar – NEO) – Every villain needs a safe house and the Islamic State (IS) is no exception. Luckily for IS, it has two, possibly three waiting for it, all of them courtesy of NATO and in particular the United States.

The war in Syria has been going particularly poor for IS. With Russian air power cutting their supply lines with Turkey and the Syrian Arab Army closing in, it may soon be time for them to shop for a new home.

If the war is going bad for IS, it is going even worse for the supporting powers that have armed and funded them. To understand where IS might go next, one must first fully understand those supporting powers behind them. The premeditated creation of IS and revelations of the identity of their supporters were divulged in a Department of Intelligence Agency (DIA) memo first published in 2012.

It admitted:

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

The DIA memo then explains exactly who this “Salafist principality’s” supporters are (and who its true enemies are):

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

Before the Syrian war, there was Libya…

The DIA memo is important to remember, as is the fact that before the Syrian conflict, there was the Libyan war in which NATO destroyed the ruling government of Muammar Qaddafi and left what one can only described as an intentional and very much premeditated power vacuum in its place. Within that vacuum it would be eventually revealed through the death of US Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens that from the Libyan city of Benghazi, weapons and militants were being shipped by the US State Department first to Turkey, then onward to invade northern Syria.

And it appears the terrorists have been moving back and forth both ways through this US-sponsored terror pipeline.

IS has since announced an official presence in Libya, and Libya now stands as one of several “safe houses” IS may use when finally pushed from Syria altogether by increasingly successful joint Syrian-Russian military operations.

Before Libya, there was Iraq… 

Iraq, devastated by a nearly decade-long US invasion and occupation, has teetered on the edge of fracture for years. Sectarian extremism is eagerly promoted by some of the US’ strongest regional allies, particularly Saudi Arabia. The US itself has been cultivating and encouraging the separatist proclivities of select Kurdish groups (while allowing Turkey to invade and torment others) in the north, while Wahhabi extremists seek to dominate the north and northwest of Iraq.

IS itself has made its way into all of these trouble spots, coincidentally. And should the terrorist organization be flushed for good from Syria, it may find these spots yet another “safe house” that surely would not have existed had the US not intervened in Iraq, divided and weakened it and to this day worked to keep it divided and weak.

Before Iraq there was Afghanistan..

Of course, and perhaps the most ironic of all of IS’ potential “safe houses,” there is Afghanistan. Part of the alleged reasoning the United States embarked on its war in Afghanistan, stretching from 2001 to present day, was its supposed desire to deny terrorists a safe haven there.

Yet not only are terrorists still using the country as a safe haven, as pointed out in great detail by geopolitical analyst Martin Berger, the US intervention there has created a resurgence of the illegal illicit narcotics trade, and in particular a huge resurgence of opium cultivation, processing and exporting. This means huge financial resources for IS and its supporters to perpetuate its activities there, and help them project their activities well beyond.

Berger’s analysis lays out precisely the sort of narco-terrorist wonderland the US intervention has created, one so perfect it seems done by design, a blazing point on a much larger arc of intentionally created instability.

Where Russian bombs cannot follow… 

Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan would be ideal locations to move IS. Libya’s state of intentionally created lawlessness gives the US and its allies a fair degree of plausible deniability as to why they will be unable to “find” and “neutralize” IS. It will be far more difficult for Russia to organize military resources to effectively strike at IS there. Even in Iraq, Russia has significant hurdles to overcome before it could begin operating in Iraq to follow IS there, and only if the Iraqi government agreed.

Afghanistan would be problematic as well. The ghosts of Russia’s war in Afghanistan still linger, and the US is already deeply entrenched, allegedly fighting a terrorist menace that seems only to grow stronger and better funded by the presence of American troops.

But while IS will be safe from complete destruction in Syria, where it looks like finally Damascus and its allies have begun to prevail, relocating outside of Syria and its allies arc of influence in the Middle East will drastically reduce its ability to fulfill its original purpose for being, that is, the destruction of that very arc of influence.

Furthermore, its reappearance elsewhere may change regional geopolitical dynamics in unpredictable ways. It is very unlikely IS’ new neighbors will wish to sit idly by while it broods. Libya’s neighbors in Egypt and Algeria, Afghanistan’s neighbors in Pakistan, China and Iran, and Iraq itself along with Syria and Lebanon, all may find themselves drawn closer together in purpose to eliminate IS in fear that it may eventually be turned on any one of them as it was on Syria.

What is least likely is that those “supporting powers” realize this is a trick tried one time too many. While that is certainly true, it appears to be the only trick these powers have left. They will likely keep IS around for as long as possible, if for no other reason but to exhaust its enemies as they attempt to chase it to the ends of the earth.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

%d bloggers like this: