Political analyst to ST: The so-called US-Turkish “Safe zone” means nothing in strategic terms

ST

The researcher in political and military affairs Basem al-Shihawi has underscored that there are both political and military reasons behind the terrorist organizations’ repeated drone attacks against Syrian military posts in Hama and Hmeimim airbase in Lattakia.

He told the Syria Times e-newspaper that terrorists groups holed up in Idlib province would never launch such attacks without Turkey’s permission.

“First of all, it is needless to say that terrorist groups in Idlib province are controlled by Turkey, and that they would never launch such attacks without it’s permission, this is a key point in order to analyse those attacks,” he said.

The researcher added: “Ankara wants those attacks to take place in order to blackmail Moscow politically since it demonstrates Ankara’s influence over terrorists, and Ankara hopes that the drone attacks will force Russia to yield to Erdogan’s demands regarding the awaited constitutional committee and other political goals in Syria.”

He made it clear that the military reasons for the terrorists’ drone attacks are to limit the Russian Air Force’s ability to conduct efficient airstrikes against Al-Qaeda affiliated groups, to hinder Hmeimim’s role in supporting Syrian Air force, to force the Russian military command to focus more on protecting its military base, and to put more pressure over Russian and Syrian anti-air defences.

“As for the continuous attacks being carried out by terrorists despite the de-escalation zone agreement, let’s all remember that the terrorists never abided by it, and this is the reason the Syrian army launched a military operation in order to liberate northern Hama in the first place,” al-Shihawi stressed.

He referred to the fact that suicide drone attacks never stopped since the very arrival of the Russian Air Force to Syria.

“Time and again the attacks became more intense as the terrorists not only started to launch more drones, but more sophisticated ones according to the Russian Defence Ministry who declared, after examining shutdown drones, that they are based on western technology,” the researcher stated.

Erdogan wants to achieve victory over the Kurds in Syria

Regarding the so-called American-Turkish “Safe zone”, al-Shihawi declared that besides being illegal, it means nothing in strategical terms.

“Considering the fact that this region is under American occupation with the help of the so-called ‘Syrian Democratic Forces’, Washington can give whatever promises to Turkey, but is that what Erdogan actually wants?”

He believes that Erdogan’s goal is not a “safe zone”.

“What Erdogan really wants, in order to secure his position against his political rivals inside Turkey and the unsatisfied Turkish military, is a clear victory over the Kurds in Syria, a victory that allows Erdogan to conduct a demographic change in northern Syria, planting pro-Turkey Syrian refugees all over the area, which is something neither Washington is able to give, nor Turkey is capable to achieve,” the researcher affirmed.

He concluded by saying: “The most important factor is neither of the above mentioned, the most important factor is the Syrian Arab Army and its allies that are getting closer from ending Idlib issue, and the moment Idlib is liberated, the occupied east and north will be the focal point for the Syrian Army, a game changer that is going to hinder all Turkish and American plans very soon.”

Interviewed by: Basma Qaddour

Also Read

Advertisements

The End of the “Greater Middle East Project”: The Case of Kurdistan

Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential elections has had dire implications for the American “Greater Middle East” project which has guided US foreign policy in the Middle East since it was first put forward in 2003. Trump’s reorientation toward internal US problems (migration, economy, protectionism), the emergence of new geopolitical rivals (China and Iran) and the turning point being reached in the war against Daesh in Syria have resulted, more or less, in a new balance of powers in the Middle East. While the situation is still rather chaotic, one fact is certainly clear: the Americans have lost their dominant position.

On top of all of this, following the events of July 2016, Turkey, one of the central players in the Middle East, headed for geopolitical rapprochement with Russia and began to distance itself from the United States. Turkish authorities accused Washington of having played a role in the attempted coup, driving a wedge in the relationship of the long-time allies. Up to this point, Turkey, together with Israel, were seen as outposts for pushing US foreign policy interests in the Middle East. However, contradictions began to emerge over the US’ reliance on the Kurdish separatists, who are locked in a state of open conflict with the Turkish government. As a result of disagreements over this issue, America began to lose one of its most important regional partners. After the coup attempt, hostilities between Turkey and the West escalated even further: Turkey openly discussed the possibility of a withdrawal from NATO, the West countered by threatening Turkey’s ongoing EU integration process.

Unsuccessful negotiations between Washington and Ankara over the extradition of accused coup leader Fethullah Gulen only complicated matters further, as did disputes over Turkey’s detention of Pastor Andrew Branson. The contradictions eventually reached their sharpest point as the US attempted to dissuade, and ultimately, threaten Turkey over their purchase of Russian S-400 missile defense systems.

In parallel with these processes, Saudi Arabia and Qatar began to adjust their foreign policy accordingly. Realizing that the West could no longer fully control the situation in the region, Qatar began to seek support from Russia, which had successfully shown the strength of its influence in Syria.

Qatar, being a traditional ally of Turkey (predominantly via the Muslim Brotherhood), began to follow Turkey’s lead, even improving relations with Iran. Saudi Arabia, a regional adversary of Qatar, was forced to follow a similar strategy… of course, not in terms of improving relations with Iran (their main regional adversary) but by establishing ties with Russia. This is evidenced in Riyadh’s attempt to buy S-400s from Moscow against Washington’s wishes.

Thus, the United States has lost most of its regional partners, with only the invariable Israel remaining a part of the Greater Middle East project. Trump has bent over backward to keep this relationship secure, even if it means finally destroy Washington’s relations with the Islamic world altogether and instead rely on the Kurds… a plan as obvious as it is failed.

Revising the Greater Middle East Strategy

The Greater Middle East project was the guiding light of US foreign policy strategy in countries like Afghanistan, Pakistan and Central Asia for decades. As of 2011, the project grew to include the Arab nations of North Africa and Syria in particular. On a project map designed by J. Kemp and R. Harkavy, the Republic of Turkey and Kazakhstan were also included.

The project aimed to spread and deepen “democracy” in the region. The plan had two sides: the official one, which was supposed to contribute to a rise in power for states led by pro-Western reformers (initially completely unrealistic) and the unofficial one, which was to actively destabilize existing Islamic regimes, support color revolutions, riots and even bring about regime change.

Creating controlled chaos has always been a central goal of the project. This goal was realized in Libya and Iraq, but its implementation in Syria was disrupted by the effective policy of Russia and Syria’s alliance with Iran and Turkey. In addition to these major powers, Hezbollah played a critical role in disrupting Washington’s plans.

However, the plan also involved the creation of a wider arc of instability – from Lebanon and Palestine to Syria, Iraq, the Persian Gulf and Iran – right up to the Afghanistan border, where NATO garrisons are located. The levers of the project were numerous: large-scale financial investments in the economies of the Middle Eastern countries, support for extremist groups, information warfare, alongside open provocations and false-flags operations. During the implementation of the project, many Middle Eastern countries underwent “color revolutions” backed by Western operators who induced controlled chaos and exploited social media networks in order to use various countries’ social, political, religious, ethnic and economic problems against them. During the “Arab Spring”, this strategy led to regime change in 3 states: Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, while Libya and Syria were left in a state of civil war.

The US and EU were never completely unified over the project. At one G8 summit, the Greater Middle East project was criticized by French President Jacques Chirac, arguing that Middle Eastern countries do not need this kind of forcibly exported “democracy.”

The strategy for “spreading democracy” in the region had essentially become thinly , if at all, veiled US intervention in the domestic political life of Middle Eastern states. Military assaults began in Afghanistan, Iraq, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Sudan and Syria. However, the results were less than favorable for most, resulting in floods of refugees, including representatives of terrorist organizations. Western Europe was forced to face the brunt of the backlash for Bush and Obama’s Middle Eastern adventures. The globalists and neoconservatives were united in their efforts, and although their destructive goals were achieved, the majority of Americans did not even understand why these costly and brutal operations were being prioritized.

Trump properly grasped the mood of voters and promised to curtail the Greater Middle East project. After coming to power, he at least began to move in that direction: in December 2018, he decided to withdraw all American troops from Syria.

Project Implementation Opportunities

After the wave of color revolutions and the Arab spring, some states in the Middle East realized the real threat posed by America’s evolving strategy. Before their eyes, centralized and well-ordered states were turning into ruins. It was not just a change of leadership: the very existence of entire countries was threatened. Hence, many leaders concluded the need for a new emphasis on sovereignty. For example, Turkey, an important player in the region, focused on geopolitical interaction with Russia and China, reorienting itself toward the Eurasian axis which caused a crisis in relations with the United States (the purchase of the S-400s from Russia led the United States to refuse to sell Turkey F-35 fighter jets as previously agreed).

The region around Syria was gradually cleared of extremist groups, with the remaining militants relegated to the province of Idlib and the south-east of the country. When Imran Khan became Prime Minister, Pakistan also moved further away from the United States and began to develop pro-Chinese policies while establishing strategic relations with Russia.

Looking at all of these factors, we can conclude that the Greater Middle East project has already been curtailed.

However, the American strategy only partly depends on who runs the White House. That’s why it’s important to understand the role of the so-called Deep State in US politics. The Deep State has its own logic and direction, something which Trump needs to take into account. Due to the Deep State’s influence, America continues to take advantage of a number of complex problems for the region, one critical example being its tactic of fomenting conflict through support for the forces fighting for an independent Kurdistan. This conflict in particular is shaping  up to be the “last battle” of the Greater Middle East project.

The Kurdish Map

The Greater Middle East project, according to Ralph Peters and Bernard-Henri Levy (the plan’s most important European propagandists), involves the creation of an independent “Free Kurdistan” which includes a number of territories in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria. The creation of a single state entity through the unification of the 40 million Kurds residing in these countries could lead to a number of serious problems.

The idea of ​​creating an independent Kurdish state openly and clearly began to emerge at the end of the 19th century (the first Kurdish newspaper in Kurdish began to circulate in Cairo in 1898). At the end of the 19th century, the Kurdish people seemed as though they might actually embrace Turkey. The founder and first president of the Republic of Turkey, Kemal Atatürk, was positively greeted among the Kurds – some Alevite groups interpreted the role of Atatürk as Mahdi, the last successor of the prophet Muhammad. However, after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the Kurds did not receive their desired autonomy, which began to cause problems.

Historically, the “Kurdish map” has always been an ace-up-the-sleeve of various geopolitical powers striving for influence in the Middle East: Woodrow Wilson first supported the creation of an independent Kurdish state after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the US again supporting Kurdish forces in the 1970s in an attempt to overthrow the Iraqi Ba’ath party… in 2003, it used the Kurds to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The Iranians used the Kurds against Iraq in the 70s as well, while in more recent times the Syrians have tried to use the Kurdish issue against Turkey. Israel has strongly supported the Kurdistan project in order to weaken the Arabic States.

The fragmentation of the Kurds who live in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Turkey, as well as in the Caucasus, is one of the reasons why it is currently impossible to build a single Kurdish state. The Kurdish people have historically been prone to clan and political fragmentation. There are several factors which strongly separate the various groupings of Kurds.

One complication to the formation of an independent Kurdistan is linguistic fragmentation – Soran is spoken in eastern Iraq and Iran, while Kurmanji is spoken by Syrian, Iraqi and Turkish Kurds. Some Kurds in Iraq speak yet another dialect – Zaza.

Religious issues also hinder the unification of Kurdish tribes and clans into a single state: the majority of Kurds are Sunnis (with a large number of Sufi tariqas),  while Zoroastrian styled Yazidism is less widespread. Meanwhile, In Iran, Kurds are mainly followers of Shia Islam. Yazidism is considered the Kurdish national religion, but it is too different from orthodox Islam and even from the rather syncretic Sufi Tariqas.

Yazidism is prevalent mainly among the northern Kurds – Kurmanji.

New year celebrations in Lalish, 18 April 2017. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

The Religion is a mixture of Zoroastrianism (manifested in the doctrine of the seven Archangels and a special attitude to fire and the sun, along with a strong caste system) with the Sufi teachings of Sheikh Abi ibn Musafir. The unexplored and closed sources of the Yazidi religion strongly complicate the Kurdish factor. The Muslim nations surrounding them often characterize the Yazidi Kurds as worshipers of Shaitan. Shiite-style Kurds (mainly residing in Iran) are a separate group, difficult to reduce to the Shiite branch of Islam as such, and are more approximately a Zoroastrian interpretation of it. Interestingly, Shiite Kurds believe that the Mahdi should appear among the Kurds, suggesting a degree of ethnocentrism.

Another important factor in assessing the chances of creating an independent Kurdistan is their cultural specificity in the Iranian context: the Kurds, unlike other Iranian peoples, maintained a nomadic lifestyle far longer than others.

We can conclude that building a unified Kurdistan is essentially a utopian idea: the rich diversity of the religious, linguistic and cultural codes would be impossible obstacles in building a traditional nation-state… and this is without taking into account the stiff opposition to the project from other states in the region, including Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. For these countries, the implementation of the Greater Kurdistan project would actually mean the end of territorial integrity and a fundamental weakening of their sovereignty, and perhaps even their complete collapse (particularly given the fact that other ethnic minorities would likely want to follow the Kurdish path).

Although an independent state might be a pipe-dream, Turkey’s current tactical ally, Russia, could play a positive role in solving and regulating the Kurdish issue by other means. Being neutral in the conflict, despite historically positive relations with the Kurds, Russia could act as a mediator and guarantor of Kurdish rights while fighting to maintain the territorial integrity of existing states. Russia could assist in providing the Kurds with the possibility of cultural unification, protection and the development of their identity, but this implies the concept of a cultural and historical association rather than a political one. This association could grant the Kurds a certain degree of autonomy while preserving the territorial borders of the states in which they live.

In Iraq, a solution to the Kurdish issue is possible through the construction of a tripartite confederation between the Shiite majority, the Sunnis (with the rejection of Salafism and extremism and with the Sufis playing a predominant roe) and the Kurds (mainly Sunnis). It is also necessary to take into account Assyrian Christians, Yezidis and other ethnic-religious minorities of Iraq.

At present, Iraqi Kurds have the maximum autonomy and prerequisites for the implementation of the Kurdistan project under the leadership of Masoud Barzani. The origins of the relative independence of Iraqi Kurdistan are in American operations during the 2000s. It was during this period that Iraqi Kurds gained a maximum degree of autonomy. At the moment, Iraqi Kurdistan has its own armed forces, currency and even its own diplomats. Its main income comes from oil sales. Interestingly, the per capita GDP in Iraqi Kurdistan is quite high and exceeds that of Iran and Syria.

Moreover, in September 2017, the autonomous region’s leadership held a vote on secession from Iraq – 92.73% voters voted in favor of creating an independent Iraqi Kurdistan. Erbil’s plans in this direction have been met with negativity both in Iraq and in Turkey (despite Erdogan’s partnership with Barzani).

However, the situation in Iraq has its own difficulties and complications – the Barzani clan controls only half of the region, the second part of Iraqi Kurdistan, including the capital located in Sulaymaniyah, is controlled by the Talabani clan (the “Patriotic Union of Kurdistan” party is subordinate to it). Conditional partnerships have been established between the Barzani clan and the Talabani clan, but their orientations differ due to their diverging political priorities: this also manifests itself in terms of foreign policy: The Talabani clan is focused on Iran while the Barzani clan is focused on Turkey. This situation shows that even in the strongest part of Kurdistan there are heavy internal contradictions which make state-hood impossible.

In Turkey, the project faces several particularly sharp problems, a notable one being the ruling circle’s strong views on the Kurdish issue. Erdogan came to power in part by playing on the Kurdish factor (in efforts such as the Western-supported Kurdish–Turkish peace process), but, as relations with the West worsened, he began to return to a national Kemalist course, which traditionally takes a tough anti-separatist position, seeing any compromises with separatists as weakening Turkey’s national unity. As a result, Erdogan is now pursuing a policy of suppressing the movement for Kurdish autonomy – the PKK has responded in turn by carrying out terrorist attacks and issuing ultimatums.

The most stable situation for the Kurds in the Middle East is the one in Iran. The Kurds there live in four provinces – Kurdistan, Kermanshah, Western Azerbaijan and Ilam.

Source: Wikimedia Commons

The second seed of the Kurdish state is a network of associations of followers of the partisan leader Abdullah Ocalan, a left-wing politician, and the mastermind/creator of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party. Ocalan’s teachings are about creating a special political union of Kurds in the spirit of “democratic confederalism”. This project promotes the creation of a virtual Kurdish state, based on socialist ideas. The center of this teaching is currently Syrian Kurdistan (Rojava), which has raised strong concerns from Turkey who sees the Syrian Kurds as an integral part of the PKK. Consequently, Erdogan’s policy is based on the uncompromising political rejection of the Syrian Kurds political formations, which is why he is preparing for military operations in northeastern Syria.

In Ocalan’s ideas, we find the interesting postmodern political project of creating a post-national virtual state called a “confederation” which relies on disparate associations, clans and tribes rather than a formal nation. This network-based society surprisingly coincides in its general features with postmodern theories in international relations, promoting the end of the era of nation-states and the need for a transition to a virtual structure of power. In philosophical terms, the idea is inspired by left-wing French postmodernists, in particular, the Deleuzian concept of the “rhizome” – a scattered mushroom in which there is no center, but everything is still connected in a network. The idea is manifested in the Kurdish anarcho-communist project which combines leftist ideas, postmodern philosophy and feminism. Representatives of anarchist communities inspired by globalist financier George Soros also have sympathy for the idea of a virtual rhizomatic state.

The main enemies of Ocalan’s project are Turkey and Syria (in Syria, the followers of Ocalan are based in the North – they call themselves the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria). Support for the Syrian Kurds has also come from the US government… for several years, they have sent financial assistance to the Kurds to fight Daesh terrorists. In the Western media, far more attention was paid to the Kurd’s fight against Daesh than the actual large-scale victories of the Syrian and Turkish armies.

Israel is betting heavily on the Kurds in its regional policy since the Israelis are well aware that a Kurdish state would be a fundamental problem for all of their regional opponents (Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Syria). Although the Kurds are Muslims, and therefore hardly enthusiastic about Israeli policy toward Palestine, the pragmatic interests of Kurdish nationalism often outweigh confessional solidarity.

Following the recent strengthening of Assad’s position in Syria, Iran’s tough opposition to US policy and Turkey’s geopolitical reversal toward multipolarity, America is also increasingly putting its money on the Kurds, literally and figuratively. In 2019, the Ministry of Defense allocated $300 million to support Kurdish forces in the war against Daesh. The United States, according to UWI sources, continues to supply arms to Kurdish militants from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) today, using them as a weapon in the struggle to overthrow Assad. A report by the Carnegie Foundation notes that Kurdish groups in Syria and Iraq that successfully conducted operations against Daesh are “key US allies.” In the Western media, the Kurds are usually portrayed as “peacekeepers.”

The Americans (who are well aware of the difficulties involved) believe that the process of trying to build a Kurdish state will weaken or destroy their Middle Eastern rivals. After all, the creation of a free Kurdistan would entail the territorial division of Syria, Iran, Iraq and Turkey, creating a wide-ranging but controlled chaos.

An Alternative to the Greater Middle East Project

It has become apparent that the Kurdish issue needs to be resolved in the framework of a new project, an alternative to the globalist’s Greater Middle East strategy. It is important to create an alternative project that could rely on Ankara, while taking into account the interests of Baghdad, Tehran and Damascus. It should be Moscow, and not Washington (at least, not the American deep state) that plays the central mediating role. The project should work to preserve the territorial integrity of existing nations and even strengthen their overall sovereignty… at the same time, it is extremely important to take into account the diversity of peoples in the Middle East, and the Kurds in particular. Within this new political framework, the Kurds should have certain powers and guarantees – but at the same time, they must not be allowed to be exploited by globalist forces looking to destabilize the region to their own advantage.

In the context of the transformation of the Middle East, powers should reorient themselves towards cooperation with the Eurasian pole. China and Russia could become the key players in resolving the Kurdish issue, ensuring a balance between real Kurdish interests and the countries seeking to maintain their territorial integrity. The only way out of the current Kurdish impasse is finding a strict, consistent and integrated approach to solving the problem of Kurdish identity.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

All images in this article are from UWI unless otherwise stated

WAR REPORT: MIGHTY ISRAELI ARMY ABANDONED MILITARY FACILITY AFTER HEZBOLLAH ATGM STRIKE

South Front

The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) abandoned their military facility at Avivim in Upper Galilee, which had been targeted by Hezbollah anti-tank guided missile strike. According to a released video, IDF troops left behind at least 2 pieces of military equipment and multiple personal possessions, including ammunition.

The escalation at the Lebanese-Israeli contact line happened on September 1 after IDF shelled unidentified targets at Shebaa Farms. After the incident, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared a de-facto victory saying that Israel “acted with a combination of decisiveness and sagacity” and its forces achieved all of their “goals”. However, at the first look, the abandoned facility does not seem to be a sign of the victory. Probably, this was a tactical retreat.

On September 3, FoxNews and ImageSat Intl. came with a new report on Iranian presence in Syria. According to the report citing “multiple Western intelligence sources” and showing satellite imagery, Iran has established a new military base near al-Bukamal and “has plans to house thousands of troops at the location”. The report came with a common speculation that the supposed base could be use to house Iranian precision-guided missiles.

The situation at the Syrian-Iraqi border has been for a long time a part of the fearmongering campaign by mainstream media that started after the US-led coalition appeared to be unable to separate Syria and Iraq by capturing the border area employing its proxies. The main point of this campaign is that Iran will use the established ground link to supply its allies in Syria and Lebanon with weapons and equipment.

In Syria, forces of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (that are the core of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces) shelled positions of Turkish-backed armed groups near Azaz and Mari. Pro-Turkish forces responded with a series of limited artillery strikes.

The situation at the contact line between the Syrian Army and militants in southern Idlib remains calm.

HEZBOLLAH REVEALS VIDEO OF ATGM STRIKE ON ISRAELI ARMOURED PERSONNEL CARRIER

Hezbollah-linked al-Manar TV channel has released a video showing Hezbollah’s anti-tank guided missile strike on Israel’s Wolf armoured personnel carrier near Avivim in Upper Galilee. Hezbollah says that the vehicle was destroyed and several Israeli soldiers were killed or injured. Israel denies any casualties.

Hezbollah Reveals Video Of ATGM Strike On Israeli Armoured Personnel Carrier

Click to see the full-size image

Related Videos

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

سياسات أردوغان تتمزّقُ في التدافع الروسي الأميركي!

أغسطس 23, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم

التنافس بين هذين الفريقين الدوليين على استمالة تركيا ليس جديداً لكنه انتهى منذ خمسينيات القرن الماضي الى الانتصار الأميركي مكللاً بانتساب تركيا الى حلف «الناتو» وتكوّرها ضمن العباءة الأميركية.

هناك عاملان مستجدان طرآ على هذه المعادلة التاريخية.

وهما انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي وبداية المشروع الأميركي لتشكيل الشرق الأوسط الجديد.

فاعتقد الأميركيون ان الترك على سالف عهدهم مؤيدون تلقائياً لأيّ تحرك أميركي جديد.

فيما اعتقد الأتراك انها الفرصة التاريخية الملائمة لإعادة إحياء نسبية لعظمتهم التاريخية من خلال الالتصاق بالحركة الأميركية الجديدة.

Related image

فهم من أكبر دول الشرق الاوسط وأقواها، فلماذا لا يحق لهم المشاركة في «لعبة» استعمارية تدور في منطقتهم وعلى صهوة جواد عثماني او بعمائم الاخوان المسلمين؟

هنا بدأ التباين يقترب والى حدود التناقض خصوصاً أن انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي أوحى للأميركيين بانتفاء حاجتهم للخدمات التركية التي كانت تشكل قبل 1990 حاجزاً في وجه التقدم السوفياتي نحو الشرق الاوسط.

بما يسهم في تدني الدور التركي عند الأميركيين إنما من دون التخلي عنه في وجه روسيا على الاقل.

لكن أردوغان لم يقتنع فأفغانستان لم تستسلم وإيران اخترقت النفوذ الأميركي بنسج تحالفات مع بلدان كثيرة في الشرق الاوسط وتمكنت من الحد من تأثيره بشكل كبير في محطات اساسية في المنطقة.

بالمقابل وضعت تركيا امكاناتها الاستخبارية والتسليحية والحدودية والعسكرية في خدمة انتقال أعداد مذهلة من الإرهابيين الى العراق وسورية، إلا أن هذه الأدوار بدت في حينه متكاملة مع المشروع الأميركي بإسناداته السعودية والإماراتية والإسرائيلية.

إلا ان نتائج الجهود التركية لم تتطابق مع الحسابات الأميركية بدليل ان الأتراك استغلوا حتى آخر درجة ممكنة أهمياتهم الحدودية مع سورية والعراق وتجانسهم العرقي مع ذوي الأصول التركمانية في سورية والعراق وارتباطهم الايديولوجي بفدرالية الاخوان المسلمين العالمية.

فتوصلوا عبر استعمال هذه المقوّمات الى بناء إرهاب خاص بهم في عشرات التنظيمات المتنوّعة ناسجين مع متفرّعات منظمة القاعدة الإرهابية، ارتباطاً الى حدود الدمج مستغلين بالطبع رفضهم للعلاقة الأميركية مع الأكراد في سورية والعراق. لانها تهدد حسب مزاعمهم الوحدة الاجتماعية والسياسية والوطنية لبلدهم تركيا وعلى مستوى وحدة الكيان.

ما بدا خارجاً عن المألوف بالنسبة للأميركيين هو التقارب الروسي التركي الذي عكس سياسة روسية حكيمة تتعامل مع الأتراك بعقلية احتواء طموحهم الإقليمي وليس الصدام معه، مقابل عقد اتفاقات ثنائية بين البلدين لتصدير الغاز الروسي الى أوروبا وإعادة السماح للسياح الروس بارتياد تركيا مع عقد صفقات اقتصادية ضخمة وأسلحة مختلفة بينها أس أس 400 للدفاع الصاروخي.

لقد جاء هذا التقارب ثمرة تقارب سياسي بين البلدين التحقت به إيران منتجاً معادلتي «سوتشي وآستانا» لبناء حلول للازمة السورية.

وما أن أدركت وعود تركيا مراحل استحقاقها خصوصاً لجهة سحب الإرهابيين المرتبطين بها لنحو عشرين كيلومتراً الى داخل منطقة ادلب، حتى عاد الأميركيون الى محاولة إعادة تركيا الى قطيعها، عارضين عليها «منطقة آمنة مزعومة» عند حدودها مع سورية كوسيلة لاحتواء ما تعتقد انه خطر آتٍ عليها في المشروع الكردي في شرقي الفرات والشمال، وهو مشروع مدعوم أميركياً وبشكل علني هدفه رص الصفوف الكردية مع مشروع واشنطن وبشكل معادٍ للدولة السورية واستخدام الانتشار الديموغرافي الكردي في إيران والعراق وسورية وتركيا بما يرفع من فاعلية الاختراقات الأميركية.

وهكذا يتضح أن الأميركيين استفادوا من المراوغة التركية في تلبية نتائج آستانة لجهة سحب إرهابييها من قسم من إدلب، مراهنين على عدم الرغبة التركية بالخروج النهائي من الناتو، والعالم الغربي حيث يعمل ستة ملايين تركي في دوله المتنوّعة. فحاولوا فجذبوا الترك في عرض يقضي بنشر قوات تركية في منطقة سورية حدودية بعمق 14 كيلومتراً وطول لا يتعدى الثمانين كيلومتراً مع دعم احتلالهم لعفرين وإدلب وشمالي حماه وبعض ارياف حلب.

إن هذا العرض الأميركي «السخي» وبالطبع من أكياس الآخرين كالعادة يكشف عن محاولة أميركية لإيقاف التقدم الروسي عند حدود ادلب بواسطة المراوغة التركية بعدم تنفيذها للاتفاقات.

لقد اعتقد أردوغان ان الروس بحاجة بنيوية إليه، بما يسمح له بالمزيد من المراوغة والألاعيب متوهماً بوجود منعٍ روسي على أي عملية عسكرية سورية ضد مغامراته، مراهناً أيضاً على الانهماك الإيراني في التصدي للحرب الأميركية في الخليج.

Image result for ‫اردوغان السلطان العثماني‬‎

إلا ان الواضح هنا، يتعلق بدولة سورية حليفة لروسيا وإيران، تعرف مصالحها والحدود التي يجب أن تقف عندها، بدليل أن تركيا لم تحترم مع موسكو وطهران أياً من التزاماتها على حساب السيادة السورية، كما ان الرئيس بوتين بات مقتنعاً بضرورة الذهاب الى الميدان العسكري لكبح الأميركي «وعقلنة» التركي فتبلورت معركة الجيش السوري في إدلب، نتيجة إصرار سوري واستحسان روسي وتأييد إيراني، ففوجئ الأتراك بالجيش السوري يتقدّم بسرعة نحو خط العشرين كيلومتراً في عمق إدلب بما أسهم ايضاً في تحرير أرياف حماه الشمالية وحاول الجيش التركي بإيعاز أميركي التقدم نحو خان شيخون لحماية الإرهابيين ومنعهم من الانسحاب وقراءة المدى الذي يريده الروس، وجاء الرد بقصف استهدف الرتل التركي من طائرات حربية سورية، أرغمته على التوقف.

 

عند هذا الحد، فهم الأميركيون ان روسيا مستعدة لمقارعتهم في الميدان، بوسائلها المباشرة، وعبر تغطية التقدم الميداني للجيش السوري. فهذه مرحلة مناسبة لسورية وروسيا لإفهام التركي بوقف محاولات الاستفادة من الصراع الروسي الأميركي على حساب الدور الروسي من جهة والسيادة السورية من جهة ثانية.

وهذه رسالة «إدلبية أولى» سرعان ما تليها رسائل متتابعة من الجيش السوري المدعوم من حلفائه لإخراج الدور التركي من سورية وتالياً من العراق وذلك لإعادته الى بلاده التي تستعد للقضاء على آخر السلاطين الوهميين رجب طيب أردوغان.

Sen. Richard Black to ST: Establishment of an occupied zone within Syria is prohibited by international law

ST

Thursday, 08 August 2019 20:55

Virginia Senator Richard Black has described the ‘safe’ zone which the United States and Turkey seek to establish in the north of Syria as an ‘occupied’ zone, stressing that this move is prohibited by the International law.

In an interview with Syria Times e-newspaper, the senator said that the actions of the US ignore the fact that this is not the imaginary land known as “Kurdistan.” It is Syria.

“The idea of a “no-fly zone” was intended to facilitate an all-out attack on Syria,” the Senator asserted, adding that Washington wants to preserve the Kurdish-run pocket in northern Syria in order to inhibit trade between Iran and Syria.

Following is the full text of the interview:

ST: Can the US and Turkey establish a ‘safe’ zone in the north of Syria?

Sen. Black : The US and Turkey disagree over the dimensions of any “safe” zone in northern Syria. Turkey would like to double the size of the zone proposed by the United States. The fact that the United States and Turkey are increasingly hostile powers makes cooperation very tenuous.

Establishment of an occupied zone within Syria is, of course, prohibited by international law. It seems that international law has been disregarded so frequently that it is losing its validity across the globe.

Turkey will never accept the permanent establishment of a Kurdish State in Northern Syria. Turkey will expand its control, over time, until the so-called Kurdish State disappears. The United States cannot establish a Kurdish State without an unending military commitment to occupy Northern Syria.

It is important to remember that Kurds comprise a distinct minority of the population of Northeast Syria. The dominant population are Arabs. It is unfair to the Arab population to force them to live under Kurdish domination. Already, there has been considerable friction with the Christian Arab population in the region. Kurds have closed a number of Christian schools which functioned independently under the Syrian government.

There has been much unrest among Arab Muslims who chafe under Kurdish minority rule.  Raqqa is by far the largest city in Northeast Syria. It is almost entirely an Arab city. Nonetheless, the proposed Kurdish state would force Syrian Arabs to submit to a Kurdish minority who are not even present in Raqqa.

The actions of the US ignore the fact that this is not the imaginary land known as “Kurdistan.” It is Syria. When it was governed by Syria, the region was free of terrorist activity and Kurds presented no threat to Turkey. The same could be said of Iraq before it was also invaded. It was the invasion of Iraq, followed by the invasion of Syria, which generated ISIS and all the other terrorist activity plaguing the region today.

ST: Why does Washington help Turkey establish this  zone?

 Sen. Black: Elements of the Washington deep state continue to dream of overthrowing the legitimate Syrian government led by President Bashar al-Assad. In order to placate Turkey, they must insulate them from the perceived threat of Kurdish terror. Washington wants to preserve the Kurdish-run pocket in northern Syria in order to inhibit trade between Iran and Syria. Additionally, the United States hopes to deprive the Kurdish people of oil and agricultural production generated in the region. That oil and food have always provided electricity, transportation, industrial power, and food supplies to the entire Syrian nation. The strategic objective is to impoverish the Syrian people by depriving the nation of these essential products while giving them to the small Kurdish minority in Syria.

ST: What will be the repercussions of such move?

Sen. Black: None of these problems would exist if the United States would permit the Syrian Government to reoccupy its sovereign territory in the north. The Syrian Government could quickly arrange to replace all Kurdish troops near the border with Turkey. At the same time, Syrian Kurdish soldiers could be redirected to guard the ISIS prison camps, which hold about ten thousand prisoners today. This would benefit the entire region by helping to feed the people, rebuild the country, and reduce military tensions throughout the region. It would promote regional trade, which would lift millions from poverty.

ST: Since the start of war on Syria, Turkey has announced several times that it will establish a safe zone in the north of Syria, why is it doing that?

Sen. Black: Proposed safe zones in Northern Syria have taken various forms. Senator John McCain wanted to establish a “no-fly zone.” He intended to use that as a pretext for a gigantic aerial attack against Syria, just as he had done in Libya. You may recall, that in 2011, the establishment of a “no-fly zone,” was followed by an immediate, devastating aerial campaign that killed hundreds of thousands of Libyans and destroyed the major population centers of the nation. After that was done to Libya, terrorists engaged in massive slaughter and western powers looted the national treasury, stealing 149 tons of gold, 2,000 tons of silver, and over half a trillion US dollars and Euros. So, the idea of a “no-fly zone” was intended to facilitate an all-out attack on Syria. Fortunately, that idea did not gain traction.

Turkey has also attempted to carve out Syrian territory to provide a safe haven for terrorists. Today, Turkey is massively supplying Tahrir al-Sham (Al-Qaeda in Syria) in Idlib Province with military vehicles, missiles, and ammunition. The Central Intelligence Agency has released supplies from its warehouses to assist in this endeavor.

If Turkey and the United States were successful in their efforts to carve out a terrorist state in Idlib Province, they would establish an Islamic Caliphate dominated by Abu Mohammad al-Julani, the head of Tahrir al-Sham (al-Qaeda in Syria). Having boasted about the US role in destroying the ISIS Caliphate, we ourselves will have established an al-Qaeda caliphate ruled by an “Especially Designated Global Terrorist” with a $10 million bounty on his head. If successful, it would be especially ironic that the United States, which lost three thousand dead in the terror attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon on 9/11, would become the nation responsible for the establishment of a permanent terrorist caliphate led by those same people.

It is also ironic that one-third of America’s national debt was incurred fighting wars of aggression against Middle Eastern nations, though not a single benefit has ever flowed to the American people or has ever enhanced our national security. Yet from almost its outset, Vice President Dick Chaney labeled war against the Middle East as “the long war.”

How was it that Dick Chaney and the Central Intelligence Agency understood the agonizing longevity of these wars when the American people did not?

This leaves one to question whether the designers of American foreign policy have the faintest interest in the well-being of our nation or its people.

Related links:

http://syriatimes.sy/index.php/editorials/opinion/42014-sen-richard-black-i-do-not-want-more-americans-dying-for-saudi-arabia

http://www.syriatimes.sy/index.php/editorials/opinion/41821-sen-richard-black-to-st-the-world-would-be-much-safer-if-president-trump-replaced-bolton-and-pompeo

Interviewed by: Basma Qaddour

Syria warns US-Turkey safe zone deal is a plot for “expansionist ambitions”

Image result for Syria warns US-Turkey safe zone deal is a plot for “expansionist ambitions”

Syria warns US-Turkey safe zone deal is a plot for “expansionist ambitions”

Monday, August 12, 2019

After three days of intense negotiations in Ankara, US and Turkish officials reached an agreement on Wednesday to create a joint operations center and set up a safe zone east of the Euphrates in north eastern Syria. Deal details have not yet been disclosed.

This last minute deal between Washington and Ankara is in response to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s announcement on Sunday that Turkey was prepared to carry out a unilateral cross-border operation to push back Kurdish militias on the Syrian Turkish border east of the Euphrates river, if the Washington didn’t cut ties with the Kurdish militias and create a safe zone in northern Syria.

The two NATO allies agreed that the Turkish based joint operations center would be created as soon as possible to address Turkey’s security concerns.  The safe zone would become a “peace corridor”, and efforts would be made so that Syrian refugees could return home.

However, wanting peace is just a front for Erdogan’s true motives. The Syrian government categorically rejects the deal as a blatant attack on Syria’s territorial sovereignty and warns of Erdogan’s real reasons for establishing a so-called safe-zone on Syrian soil.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry said “The agreement constitutes a partnership between the US and Turkey over aggression against Syria that would serve the interest of the Israeli occupation entity. It also reflects how evasive and misleading the policies of the Turkish regime are.”

On Thursday an official Syrian source at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told SANA “Syria expresses categorical rejection of the agreement announced by the US and Turkish occupations on establishing the so-called [safe zone] which constitutes a blatant aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic and a flagrant violation of the principles of international law and the UN Charter,”.

Turkey is using the excuse of protecting its borders against the US-backed Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) who Turkey views as the Syrian branch of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), to fulfill its long-term mission of expanding its territory by invading and balkanizing its sovereign neighbor.

Many nations including the United States, who designated the PKK as a terrorist group in 1997, and Turkey who has been in conflict with the PKK since their inception in 1984, consider them to be a terrorist organization.

Another Turkish goal is to replace the indigenous diverse ethnic population in northern Syrian with extremists that are sympathetic to Erdogan, like we have seen in Afrin and other towns on Turkey’s border in northern Syria.

Erdogan’s plans for invasion and annexation will put Christian minorities in danger, some of whom can trace their lineage back to the original inhabitants of this land. However, Kurdish militias have also targeted them by using forced conscription and other Daesh-like intimidation tactics. The Kurdish Connection: Israel, ISIS And U.S. Efforts To Destabilize Iran explains more about how Kurdish militias have been used by the US to achieve their own objectives in the Middle East.

statement issued by the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs states “This agreement has very clearly exposed the US-Turkish partnership in the aggression against Syria which serves the interest of the Israeli occupation entity and the Turkish expansionist ambitions and it unequivocally exposed the misleading and evasiveness which govern the policies of the Turkish regime.”

“Syria calls on the Arab people to be aware of the dangers of the expansionist ambitions of the Turkish regime which is spreading the killing and chaos in different parts of the Arab world from Syria to Libya and the Sudan and it will not stop till it will satisfy its illusions on reviving the Ottoman Sultanate,” the source said.

The Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs representative concluded by saying that “Syria calls on the international community and the UN to condemn the US-Turkish flagrant aggression which constitutes a dangerous escalation and poses a threat to peace and security in the region and the world and hinders all positive efforts for finding a solution to the crisis in Syria.”

All the major players involved in the proxy war in Syria, including Turkey, Russia, and Iran want the US to leave, except of course the US-backed Kudish SDF which are just a rebranding of the YPG.

US President Donald Trump has expressed interest multiple times in a swift troop withdrawal ,and to let the local regional players figure things out. However, the war hawks surrounding him in Washington, along with the Pentagon have derailed his plans since last December. They have stressed that US interests need to be protected by having a long-term presence in the oil-rich, agriculturally rich, breadbasket of Syria, to keep an eye on Iran while protecting their ally, Israel.

As I have stated previously establishing an independent Kurdish state in Syria is just part of the decades-long Israeli-American plan to weaken and divide all the nations neighboring Israel.

Although it might seem like Russia has been uncharacteristically quiet this week regarding the latest developments with Turkey and the US in north eastern Syria, Russia has consistently stood by the Syrian government’s right to protect its territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Whether its occupation and annexation by the Kurds or Turks, Kurdification or Turkification, the Syrian government and military categorically reject any infringement on their land, and have adamantly stated they will take back every inch of Syrian territory from terrorists or occupiers.

Source: InfoBrics

 

Erdogan Betrays Putin, Again, Throws Himself Under the US Feet

 

Turkey / Turkish President Recep Tayib Erdogan New Ottoman رجب طيب اردوغان العثمانيون الجدد

Against all odds considering the enhancing relations with Russia and Iran and bitter relations with the USA and enmity relations with the US’s Kurdish militias, the Turkish regime reached an illegal agreement to establish a ‘safe zone’ inside Syria with his US ‘frenemies’ against international law and in blatant breach to Syria’s sovereignty, Turkey has long claimed it respects, only in media. The same US that supported the military coup attempt against Erdogan in 2016 and was saved by Russian Putin.

First, watch this short video showing late Necmettin Erbakan, Erdogan’s own mentor, speaking about the Turkish pariah and Erdogan proving what his mentor says:

What else to expect from a sick personality that sold his soul to evil for a promised futuristic role on the account of hundreds of thousands of dead bodies of Muslims at most, Christians, and even of his own followers? The head of the Turkish regime the pariah Erdogan is playing in the pastime after his free fall in his country’s latest municipal elections and ratings and before his final eradication from the political life in his country holds on to the last stray with his old masters.

Recep Tayib Erdogan is ready to send Turkey to sleep with not only who pays more, but who would just pat on the butts of the largest country overlooking the Levant. Instead of being the main player in the region, the Turks have accepted to be the most fingered country in the region, for nothing tangible.

Nothing strange in what some with no honorable principle would call pragmatism in international relations where it’s more like selling off to the current ‘man’ in the room. Erdogan has breached each article of the famous Adana Acrrod between Turkey and Syria, which regulates the relations between the two countries and allowed Turkey to strengthen its economy when Syria opened the gates of the rest of the world for Turkey after the Europeans closed it for them. Not only did the regime of Erdogan breach the agreement but went as far as opening Turkey’s bedroom as a whorehouse to every rapist the lunatic could bring from all sides of the planet to destroy the Syrian state and cause the maximum damage to the Syrian people’s lives and their source of living.

The same Erdogan who, with his old buddy Abdallah Gul, turned against their own mentor Erbakan, and after the demise of Erbakan and reaching power, he turned against his own buddy Gul who freed him from prison and appointed him as the prime minister.

Erdogan replaced Gul with Ahmet Davotuglo to later turn against him as well in his path to absolute dictatorship. The current main threat to unseat Erdogan from the lavish presidential palace is his former strong ally Turkish former minister of economy Ali Babacan who resigned from Erdogan’s AKP Islamist party in anticipation to form a new party ahead of the next presidential elections in Turkey.

During the same period, the same Erdogan took his country from being a secular country to far radical anti-Islam Islamist, Muslim Brotherhood style in order to control the branches of this satanic cult across the Arab countries and beyond in the NATO-led Arab Spring plot to destroy the Arab countries with national armies and then control it under neo-Ottoman Islamist leadership.

Erdogan and Putin Meet in Moscow Discuss Syria

Haven’t we warned that Turkey is the US’s trap for Russia?

The relations with Russia are quite unique, the Russian President saved Erdogan’s neck, literally, and to get paid by betrayal after the other by the ever opportunist. The Russian leadership ran out of patience being the guarantor of the Syrian state in the Astana de-escalation agreement in regards to Idlib, while the Turkish regime instead of dismantling its loyal terrorists, especially those of Al-Qaeda, Hurras Al-Din, Turkestan Islamist Party, Uighurs, and their terrorist affiliates, it was strengthening these terrorist groups.

Mr. Putin, in addition, opened up opportunities for the Turkish economy allowing Russian tourism to Turkey, Russian investments in a nuclear power that Russia finances, the South Stream gas pipeline, and allowing Turkish construction companies to work in Russia.

Erdoğan
Erdoğan

When cornered in Idlib, Erdogan pulled the East Euphrates card, using the ever foolish Kurds who worked as the justification for Turkish intrusions in Syria from Jarabulus to Afrin to threatening to enter Manbij, and now to create a safe zone north of Syria across the Syrian borders with Turkey. The US couldn’t be happier, with the roles changing between it and its puppet Turkey, Trump will be using the Obama mistake of not selling Patriot missiles to Turkey to justify the US’s acceptance of the Russian S400 missiles deal with Turkey, and now they’re moving to the next step in Syria, the old plot to carve out large pieces of the country and grant it left and right, stealing Syrian riches for the interests of Israel, only.

Erdogan Delivering FSA

Nobody is asking why Israel, the supposed to be the main concerned party about the S400 in the hands of the largest Muslim army in NATO, is very silent and not criticizing this step when it went mad against Russia’s selling the very old generations of S300 to both Syria and Iran. Seems the Israelis have full trust in their man in Turkey when it comes to their own existential threats.

Erdogan, USA with you
Erdogan don’t worry, Uncle Sam with you to the end.. of you.

Erdogan does not only prove himself a constant betrayer and a flipflop, but he also has to add further steps when receiving the new ‘Jewish’ anti-Russian president of Ukraine and declaring in his presence the rejection of the Russian annexing of Crimea. He could have kept Turkey’s already known position in this regard within the diplomat channels but instead showed Mr. Putin where he positions himself more: biting the only hand that saved his neck, literally – I know I repeated this, and flipping over all agreements he committed his country to for some promised role in an already failed evil project.

We are still waiting for a Russian and Iranian official public position on this latest move by the Turkish regime since both countries are parties to the Astana agreements with Turkey.

Syria, on its part, has issued a strong official statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemning this latest brazen violation of international law and the sovereignty of the Syrian territories, labeled the presence of both Trump forces and Erdogan forces in Syria as ‘occupation forces’ with all the military, legal, and political consequences attached to labeling a force as an occupation force.

The Syrian statement also called on the separatist Kurds to return to their country after the US and Turkey have exposed their ill intentions towards Syria, and warned this is the only and last chance the Kurds have.

%d bloggers like this: