Syria in Past 24 Hour: US-Backed SDF’s Military Bases Torched in Popular Uprising in Hasaka

Thu May 23, 2019 2:31
Syria in Past 24 Hour: US-Backed SDF's Military Bases Torched in Popular Uprising in Hasaka
TEHRAN (FNA)- The people of Hasaka set on fire the military bases of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces in a Hasaka region as tensions and differences rose between people and SDF in areas under their control.

Hasaka

The angry residents of Hasaka torched the security centers of SDF across the city, the Arabic-language al-Watan newspaper reported.

The newspaper noted that people’s fury in Hasaka’s Khashman district came after SDF killed a young man who had resisted forced recruitment of soldiers by the SDF.

Al-Watan pointed to the wide differences between Hasaka people and SDF militants in Khashman region, and said the SDF has dispatched reinforcement and military equipment to the region.

Meantime, battlefield sources in Hasaka reported that Asayesh and Military Police militants affiliated to the SDF launched massive attacks on the towns of Nas Tal, Daraja, Un al-Rous and other towns in Tal Barak region, and said that the Kurdish militants have arrested tens of civilians, including teachers, for forced recruitment.

Damascus, Dara’a

The Syrian Army seized a large amount of weapons and military equipment, including Turkish and US-made arms and ammunition, in areas and military bases formerly held by the terrorists Damascus and Dara’a provinces.

The Syrian Army’s engineering units during their clean-up operations in the towns of Damascus and Dara’a province discovered several arms depots and former hideouts of the terrorists which contained large amounts of weapons and military equipment.

Meantime, a Syrian Army’s military source announced that the Syrian Army units found different kinds of machineguns, combat rifles, RPGs, mortar and shoulder-mounted rockets which were made in the US and Turkey.

Hama

The Syrian Army backed by the Russian Air Force thwarted consecutive attacks by terrorists on their military positions in Northern Hama, inflicting heavy losses on the militants and killing at least 80 of them.

The Syrian Army engaged in fierce clashes with Tahrir al-Sham al-Hay’at, Jeish al-Izzah and Turkistani Party terrorist groups who had launched massive rocket attacks on army’s military positions and exploded bomb-laden vehicles along al-Hobait-Kafr Naboudeh axis in Northern Hama.

Meantime, other Syrian Army clashed with other terrorist groups who had attacked the Syrian Army’s military positions in Tal Hawash, al-Hamirat and al-Hawiz regions.

The Arabic-language website of the Russian Sputnik News Agency quoted a military source as saying that the Russian and Syrian fighter jets pounded the contact lines of the terrorists in Khan Sheikhoun, al-Hobait, al-Qasabiyeh and Abedin in Northern Hama and Southern Idlib concurrent with several-hour-long clashes between the Syrian Army and militants.

It noted that the terrorists sustained a heavy defeat in all their failed attacks which were the heaviest of their kind in recent months, and said that at least 80 terrorists were killed and tens of others were injured as well as destroying at least 12 military vehicles and bomb-laden military vehicles.

Meantime, Tahrir al-Sham terrorists deployed in Western Aleppo launched rocket attacks on Aleppo City’s residential areas, injuring several civilians, including children.

The terrorists’ attacks on Aleppo City’s residential areas took place with the aim of supporting the terrorists in Northern Hama.

Idlib, Aleppo

Terrorists in Syria are planning chemical attacks in the Idlib de-escalation zone, as well as in the west of the Aleppo province, the head of the Russian center for Syrian reconciliation said on Tuesday.

“The militants plan to stage such provocations in the village of Jarjanaz, as well as in the town of Saraqib, where a group of children and adults — refugees from the Southern provinces of Syria — have already been gathered. Similar preparations are underway in the West of Aleppo province”, Maj. Gen. Viktor Kupchishin stated at a daily briefing, RIA Novosti reported.

Kupchishin added that terrorists operating in the Idlib de-escalation zone possess a significant amount of poisonous substances with which they fill munitions to use in staged provocations aimed at accusing the Syrian Army of “chemical attacks” against the civilian population.

Also on Wednesday, the Kurdish fighters conducted two military operations on Ankara-backed militants in occupied Afrin region in Northwestern Aleppo, killing and injuring 14 of them, media sources said.

The Kurdish-language Hawar News reported that the Afrin Liberation Forces launched fresh military operations against the Turkish Army and its allied militants in Afrin, hitting a military position of al-Jbahat al-Shamia in the village of Shara which resulted in the death of eight Ankara-backed militants and injury of three others.

The Kurdish fighters also pounded a center of Ahrar al-Sharqiyeh in the town of Bastouleh in Shirava region, killing and injuring three others.

Related Videos

Related News

Advertisements

مخاطر مرحلة ما قبل الإعلان عن «صفقة القرن» ومواجهتها

مايو 8, 2019

العميد د. أمين محمد حطيط

كما بات معلوماً تستعدّ أميركا للإعلان عن صفقة القرن الرامية لتصفية القضية الفلسطينية وتثبيت «إسرائيل» في المنطقة بموقع ريادي قيادي. وهذه تذكّر بما كان طرحه شمعون بيرس منذ 4 عقود ضمن «مشروع الشرق الأوسط الجديد» الذي قال فيه للعرب «بمالكم وثرواتكم مع فكرنا وقيادتنا ينهض الشرق الأوسط ونسيطر على العالم». واليوم وكما أعلن كوشنر عرّاب ما أسمي صفقة القرن هذه، تحضر أميركا للإعلان عن هذه الخطة الجهنمية في حزيران المقبل بخطوطها العريضة الأساسية وببعض عناوينها التفصيلية.

والجدير ذكره، أنّ هذه الخطة وحتى من غير إعلان مضمونها بشكل رسمي وضعت موضع التنفيذ في بعض جزئياتها، وشرعت أميركا بالقيام بما التزمت به في هذه الخطة حيال «إسرائيل» خاصة لجهة فرض السيادة الإسرائيلية على الأرض المحتلة في فلسطين والجولان وإسقاط حق العودة المنصوص عليه بالقرار 194، لكن الإعلان الرسمي عن الخطة والحصول على قبول الأطراف المعنيين تراه أميركا أمراً لا بد منه لضمان نجاح هذه الصفقة وتنفيذها كما أراد واضعوها.

لقد كان مقرّراً في التخطيط الأميركي أن تطلع القوى المعنية بالتنفيذ على الخطة ويُستحصل على قبولها قبل أن تعلن الخطة رسمياً، لكن ما رشح من مواقف بعض المعنيين من رفض مطلق لهذه الخطة التصفوية جعل أميركا تتراجع وتعتمد سياسة الفرض بالأمر الواقع لبعض عناصر الخطة، والضغط المتعدد الوجوه على الأطراف الرافضة بما يفرض عليها الإذعان، ويحرمها من فرص العرقلة او التعطيل. ومن هذا الباب تطل مخاطر مرحلة ما قبل الإعلان عن صفقة القرن في حزيران المقبل، ويمكن القول إنّ الفترة التي تفصلنا عن تاريخ هذا الإعلان في حزيران المقبل ستكون مرحلة خاصة وقاسية تضغط فيها أميركا على القوى الرافضة لتصفية القضية الفلسطينية وتأتي في طليعتها مكونات محور المقاومة بدءاً بإيران وسورية وصولاً الى حزب الله والفصائل الفلسطينية في غزة، خاصة حماس والجهاد الإسلامي والفصائل الفلسطينية المقاومة في غزة وخارجها، وشاملاً العراق أيضاً.

وبمراقبة السلوك الأميركي معطوفاً على دراسة تحليلية للواقع الخاص بكلّ من تلك الكيانات الرافضة لتصفية القضية الفلسطينية، نتوصّل الى توقع او تحديد مواطن العمل العدواني الأميركي الإسرائيلي ومعه أداء خليجي عربي مساعد لضمان نجاح أميركا و»إسرائيل» في تصفية القضية الفلسطينية، ونرى التالي:

أولاً: في سورية، يسجل إمعان أميركا في تنفيذ استراتيجية إطالة أمد الصراع والتصعيد الميداني في إطار حرب استنزاف بدأتها الجماعات الإرهابية التي ترعاها تركيا بتنسيق مستتر مع أميركا، مترافقاً مع تدابير انفصالية تقوم بها الجماعات الكردية شرقي الفرات وحجب ما كانت أعلنت عنه أميركا من سحب القوات الأميركية في سورية وسحبه من التداول، فضلا عن إعادة تنظيم عمل داعش في المنطقة والانتقال بها من استراتيجية الاحتلال والسيطرة المساحية الى استراتيجية الخلايا والأعمال الإرهابية الموجعة دون أن تكون لها قواعد ثابتة. كل هذا يجري مترافقاً مع ضغط أميركي وتهديد بالتدخل العسكري في حال انطلقت سورية في تنفيذ عملية عسكرية لتحرير ادلب والتفرّغ للمنطقة الشرقية.

ثانياُ: في العراق. تسعى أميركا لإعادة إنتاج وإحياء خلايا داعش دون العودة الى السيطرة المناطقية أو تكوين ما أسمي «دولة إسلامية» بل خلق تهديد أمني فاعل ومتواصل من شأنه إرباك الحكومة والشعب في العراق ودفعهما للتمسك والاستعانة بالقوات الأميركية والاستجابة للإملاءات الأميركية في مجال تركيز القواعد العسكرية خلافاً لاتفاقية الإطار الأمني والضغط لوضع اليد على نفط العراق «تسديداً لنفقات الحرب» العدوان على العراق ومنع العراق من التدخل أو الانخراط في أي شأن إقليمي أو تعاون مع محور المقاومة.

ثالثاً في غزة. التصعيد الميداني المترافق مع تشديد الحصار على القطاع وصولاً إلى ما يمكن تسميته بحالة الاختناق العام، لإجبار القطاع على القبول بما سيُلقى إليه من فتات في خطة تصفية القرن، وإشغاله بشؤونه الذاتية خاصة الحياتية معطوفة على الوضع الأمني المتفجر لمنعه من التصدي لتلك الخطة الإجرامية.

رابعاً في لبنان: تسعير عملية الضغط المالي من باب التهويل بخطورة هذا الوضع، مترافقاً مع إعادة الجدل حول شرعية المقاومة ووجوب نزع سلاحها. ومن هنا تأتي إعادة طرح مسألة مزارع شبعا والتشكيك في لبنانيتها او التهويل بالحرب المدمرة الساحقة كما التهويل بإفلاس لبنان والتخويف من إلغاء ما قدمه مؤتمر سيدر لصالح لبنان من أموال.

خامساً إيران: تصعيد الضغوط عليها وحصارها بشكل خانق في كل المجالات الاقتصادية المؤثرة على معيشة الشعب وأداء الحكومة مترافقاً مع التهديد بالمواجهة العسكرية لإنتاج بيئة إشغال ذاتي تصرف إيران عن همومها الإقليمية خاصة في فلسطين وتجعلها تمرّر صفقة القرن من غير أي تدخل يعطلها.

باختصار يمكن القول إن فترة ما قبل الإعلان عن صفقة القرن ستكون فترة قاسية موسومة بعنوان: «النار والحصار للإشغال والترويع وفرض الإذعان» لتمكين أميركا من تصفية القضية الفلسطينية على طريقتها خدمة لـ«إسرائيل» واستباحة للحقوق الفلسطينية والعربية والإسلامية، حيث إن أميركا تخيّر المنطقة بين أمرين: إما الاستسلام والإذعان لإرادتها في تصفية القضية الفلسطينية وإقامة شرق أوسط مستعمر أميركياً بإدارة إسرائيلية أو الحرب المستمرة والتجويع للتركيع. فهل تنجح الخطة؟

اعتقد أن الردّ على استراتيجية أميركا هذه الرامية لإنتاج بيئة التسليم بمخططها، لم يتأخر وقد جاء من قبل المعنيين كل وفقاً لموقعه وقدراته ومجاله وبشكل ينبئ أن الفشل سيكون حليف أميركا أولاً في تهيئة بيئة إطلاق الصفقة، وثانياً في الصفقة ذاتها. وهنا ننوّه بما صدر عن الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله من مواقف قاطعة تقول إن التهويل بالحرب لن يجدي وإن الحرب التي تهوّلون بها سترتدّ عليكم عاراً ودماراً، أما إيران فقد صاغت منظومتها العسكرية الاقتصادية وعلاقاتها بشكل يُحبط الخطة الأميركية ويسقطها ويعطل كل أهدافها، ومن جهة أخرى كان التنسيق السوري العراقي في الميدان الحدودي من جهة وعمليات الجيش السوري في منطقة إدلب كافيين للقول إن خطة أميركا لن تمرّ ولن تنجح، وأخيراً شكل مشهد النار المرتدّة من غزة وحولها جواباً قاطعاً بأن القطاع لن يخضع وبأن قرار الصمود والمواجهة لا تراجع عنه مطلقاً.

وباختصار نستطيع القول بأن أميركا وأتباعها المعنيين بصفقة القرن سيحاولون بالنار والحصار إنتاج بيئة الخضوع والإذعان لخطة ما يُسمّى «صفقة القرن» بكل وحشية ولا أخلاقية وبأعمال لا شرعية ولا قانونية من أجل تمرير الصفقة وحمل الأطراف على الإذعان لها، لكن محور المقاومة وبكل مكوّناته وكل وفقاً لدائرة عمله عازم على التصدي وإفشال المسعى ومنع تصفية القضية.

إنها مواجهة مركبة قاسية خلال فترة ستكون حامية خلال الشهر المقبل وتتطلّب مزيداً من التحمل في المجال الاقتصادي واستمراراً في الحزم والقوة في الميدان.

أستاذ جامعي وباحث استراتيجي.

 

مقالات مشابهة

Trump, Erdogan and the buffer zone in Syria ترامب وأردوغان والمنطقة العازلة في سورية

Trump, Erdogan and the buffer zone in Syria

فبراير 21, 2019

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The statements of the US President Donald Trump about his decision to withdraw from Syria include that he grants all Syria to the Turkish President Recep Erdogan who was notified that by a phone call with Trump who published that later in a tweet. The US National Security Advisor John Bolton came to the region and he made number of statements after his meetings with Israeli officials, he said that he would inform the Turkish officials and the President Erdogan that attacking the Kurds; the allies of America is something unallowable. Therefore, all of Syria became for Erdogan except the areas under the Kurdish control. When Bolton arrived to Ankara, Erdogan refused to receive him and he told him harsh words that Turkey does not get orders regarding its national security and that Washington does not distinguish between the Kurds and the militants whom it supports. Trump replied that if Turkey attacked the Kurdish militants, its Turkish economy will be collapsed. The Turks responded that they do not care about the US threat. Then a phone call between Trump and Erdogan took place that was followed by an understanding on a buffer zone established by Turkey on the Syrian borders under the consent and the support of Washington. As a result, there was a Turkish promoting campaign about its intention to establish a security buffer zone.

This context is unbelievable as political and operational plans between a super power named America and a major regional country named Turkey. The Tweets and the phone calls by the US President and his issuing statements such as “All of Syria is yours” “Do not approach from the Kurds” “I will destroy the Turkish economy” and “we support a buffer zone” do not indicate only that he is funny, but also that the Turkish President is funny too, because their feeling of inability needs something in media to support them. It is not forgettable the positions which focused on  the American-Turkish serious research in the project of the buffer zone and how the considerations  of the American and Turkish forces lead to dismiss the risk of turning this wish into a realistic project.

Trump wants us to be convinced that he is able to support Erdogan to establish a buffer zone, while he is withdrawing from Syria, although he was unable to do so while his forces were in Syria. While Erdogan wants us to be convinced that he is capable to establish a buffer zone after he fled from the battle of Aleppo and left his group defeated moving to Astana understandings to get the Russian and the Iranian appeal to avoid the confrontation which he fears, although he was unable to establish it when he challenged Russia and dropped its plane while he was leading the armed groups which had control over half of Syria. He may think that after his failure in implementing his commitments in Idlib, he can barter the coverage of the military operation which became an inevitable duty on the Syrian army, with getting a consolation prize to enter to some of the Syrian border villages. He does not understand yet that the Syrian-Russian-Iranian understanding is based on the withdrawal of all the forces which do not have legal understandings with the Syrian country and not to bargain on the Syrian sovereignty and the unity of its territories.

One stable fact approved by the Syrian position towards Erdogan’s statements that the alliance of defeated will not get during in its weakness what he wanted to get during its strength and that the Syrian country is ready for all possibilities including firing if necessary to prevent affecting its sovereignty and unity. His foolish statements have one benefit; to convince the Kurdish leaderships of the nature of their American ally and that the Syrian country is their only guarantor of security of land and people.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

ترامب وأردوغان والمنطقة العازلة في سورية 

يناير 16, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– بعد تصريحات للرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب في تفسير قراره بالانسحاب من سورية، تضمّنت قوله إنه يمنح سورية كلها للرئيس التركي رجب أردوغان، بكلمات تبلّغها أردوغان على الهاتف في اتصال مع ترامب، نشر محتواها ترامب في تغريدة يقول فيها «لقد قلت لأردوغان إن سورية كلها لك»، جاء مستشار الأمن القومي الأميركي جون بولتون إلى المنطقة وأطلق بعد لقاءاته بالمسؤولين الإسرائيليين تصريحات يقول فيها إنه سيبلغ المسؤولين الأتراك والرئيس أردوغان بأن المساس بالأكراد كحلفاء لأميركا ممنوع، فصار الموقف الأميركي عنوانه سورية كلها لأردوغان ما عدا مناطق السيطرة الكردية، وعندما وصل بولتون إلى أنقرة رفض أردوغان استقباله وسمع كلاماً قاسياً مضمونه أن تركيا لا تتلقى التعليمات في ما يخصّ أمنها القومي، وأن واشنطن لا تميز بين الأكراد والمسلحين الذين تدعمهم، فردّ ترامب بأنه إذا مسّت تركيا بالمسلحين الأكراد فسوف يدمر الاقتصاد التركي، ورد الأتراك بأنهم لا يأبهون بالتهديد الأميركي، وتم اتصال هاتفي بين ترامب وأردوغان أعقبه كلام مشترك عن التفاهم على منطقة عازلة تقيمها تركيا على الحدود مع سورية بموافقة ودعم من واشنطن، وبدأت حملة تسويق تركية لنظرية قديمة جديدة عن عزمها إقامة منطقة أمنية عازلة.

– هذا السياق يقول إن ما أمامنا هو أقل من أن نصدقه كخطط سياسية وعملياتية بين دولة عالمية عظمى هي أميركا ودولة إقليمية كبرى هي تركيا، فالانتقال بتغريدات على تويتر واتصالات هاتفية من قبل الرئيس الأميركي بمواقف تراوحت من «قلت له سورية كلها لك» إلى «إياك والمساس بالأكراد» إلى «سأدمّر الاقتصاد التركي» إلى «ندعم إقامة منطقة عازلة» لا يدلّ على خفة الرئيس الأميركي فقط، بل وعلى خفة الرئيس التركي أيضاً، وشعورهما معاً بالعجز والضعف حاجتهما لـ»البهورات» الإعلامية لصناعة قوة ليس بين يدَيْ كل منهما، ولم تكن بيدهما معاً يوم كانا معاً، والذاكرة ليست ببعيدة عن المواقف التي شكّل محورها في بحث جدي أميركي تركي في مشروع المنطقة العازلة، وكيف كانت الحسابات المشتركة لمصادر القوة الأميركية والتركية تؤدي لصرف النظر عن المخاطرة بتحويل هذه الأمنية مشروعاً واقعياً.

– يريد ترامب منا أن نقتنع أنه قادر على تقديم المساندة لأردوغان لإقامة المنطقة العازلة وهو ينسحب من سورية، بعدما لم يكن قادراً على ذلك وقواته موجودة في سورية. ويريد أردوغان منا أن نقتنع بأنه قادر على إقامة المنطقة العازلة بعدما هرب من معركة حلب وترك جماعته تُهزم، واستدار إلى تفاهمات أستانة، باحثاً عن الرضا الروسي والإيراني تفادياً للمواجهة التي يخشاها، وهو لم يكن قادراً على إقامتها يوم تحدّى روسيا وأسقط طائرتها وكان في ذروة قيادته للجماعات المسلحة التي كانت يومها تسيطر على نصف سورية، إلا إذا كانت الخفة قد بلغت به حدّ التوهم أنه بعد فشله في تنفيذ تعهداته في إدلب قادر على عرض المقايضة بين تغطية العملية العسكرية التي باتت قدراً حتمياً هناك، على يد الجيش السوري، بالحصول على ما يسمّيه جائزة ترضية بالدخول إلى بعض القرى الحدودية السورية، وهو لم يفهم بعد أن التفاهم السوري الروسي الإيراني قائم على ركيزة على تراجع عنها هي، انسحاب جميع القوات التي لا تربطها تفاهمات قانونية مع الدولة السورية وعدم المساومة على السيادة السورية ووحدة التراب السوري في ظلها.

– الحقيقة الثابتة التي أكدها الموقف السوري من تصريحات أردوغان هي أن حلف المهزومين لن يحصل في زمن الضعف على ما فشل في الحصول عليه في ذروة زمن القوة، وأن الدولة السورية مستعدّة لكل الاحتمالات بما فيها إطلاق النار إذا اقتضى الأمر ذلك لمنع المساس بسيادتها ووحدتها، وأن لتصريحاته الحمقاء فائدة واحدة هي إقناع القيادات الكردية بطبيعة حليفهم الأميركي، وأحادية خيار وضع أوراقهم كلها في عهدة دولتهم السورية كضامن وحيد لأمن الأرض والشعب في سورية.

Related Videos

Related Articles

SYRIAN WAR REPORT – APR. 22, 2019: CHEMICAL WEAPONS WAREHOUSE EXPLODED IN WESTERN ALEPPO

South Front

A supposed chemical weapons warehouse of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nursa) near city of al-Atarib in western Aleppo exploded on April 20. According to pro-government sources, the warehouse was one of the sites where militants were arming rockets and shells with toxic materials.

Members of the notorious propaganda organization “White Helmets” reportedly recovered the bodies of at least six people killed in the explosion. Three injured persons were evacuated to nearby hospitals.

The version of the events provided by pro-militant media outlets argues that the targeted facility was belonging to a local pharmaceutical company known as “al-Khalil” and stored “baby milk” only. Pro-opposition media added that the explosion was likely caused by an improvised explosive device. Nonetheless, it remains unclear who would need to blow up a baby milk storage facility.

Over the past few months, Russia and Syria have repeatedly warned that members of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the White Helmets, with assistance from Western intelligences, are making preparations for staging chemical attacks that would be blamed on the Assad government.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, Horas al-Din and several other radical groups have carried out a series of attacks on positions of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) near the so-called Idlib de-escalation zone. The most successful attacks took place in al-Saraya, northern Lattakia, where 5 SAA troops were killed and in western Aleppo, where over 15 SAA soldiers died.

Additionally, pro-militant sources as well as several Kurdish outlets, linked with the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), came with a new round of speculations about supposed clashes between “Russian” and “Iranian” forces in the provinces of Aleppo and Deir Ezzor. The SAA denounced these claims as fake news.

These claims appear to be a part of a well-coordinated military psychological operation that’s aimed to undermine the Syrian-Iranian-Russian alliance. Similar reports repeatedly appeared over the past few years, but every time they were not supported by any evidence.

The situation remains tense in the desert area between the cities of Palmyra and Deir Ezzor. The ISIS news agency Amaq claimed on April 19 that ISIS members had ambushed an SAA convoy near the al-Bishri mount killing at least 20 soldiers and destroying 4 vehicles.

SDF-linked Kurdish insurgents continued their attacks on Turkish forces in the region of Afrin. On April 19, Kurdish fighters targeted alleged Turkish positions near Maryamayn and Villat al-Qadi with anti-tank guided missiles. Pro-Kurdish sources claim that 6 Turkish soldiers were killed. However, the Turkish military released no statements regarding its casualties. Therefore, most likely the attacked positions belonged to Turkish-backed militants.

Syria’s naval port of Tartus will be given for lease to Russia for 49 years, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov told journalists on April 20 after meeting with Syria’s President Bashar Assad. Moscow will use the port for economic and logistical purposes.

Russia already has a naval facility in Tartus, which was set up at the second largest port. This military facility is currently undergoing modernization.

These developments took place amid the growing economic cooperation between Russia’s Republic of Crimea and Syria. According to official estimates, the cargo turnover between Crimea and Syria may reach 150,000t by the end of 2019. During the recent Yalta economic conference in Crimea, Syria and the local authorities reached even more agreements on the economic cooperation.

Related News

Foreign backed terrorism in Iran: Part two – US/Israeli backed insurgency and separatism in western Iran

April 18, 2019

By Aram Mirzaei for the Saker blog

Foreign backed terrorism in Iran: Part two – US/Israeli backed insurgency and separatism in western Iran

In the previous article, we examined the prevalence of US/Israeli backed terrorism in eastern Iran where Baluchi Salafists have received arms and funding from the CIA and Mossad. In this second part of the article series we will examine the US/Israeli support for terrorists and separatists in western Iran among the Kurdish ethnic group.

The Kurdish situation in western Iran

The Kurdish question in Iran is a long running one that stretches back to the WWII era. While Kurdish revolts occurred already during the 1920s these were not motivated out of nationalist sentiment but rather out of tribal opposition to the monarchy’s attempts to centralize the state of Iran. The Qajar dynasty and later the Pahlavi dynasty attempted to consolidate power around Tehran in a time when the Iranian nation was fragmented into areas of tribal and ethnic influence. Simko Shikak was one of the powerful Kurdish chieftains that with Ottoman backing led the first revolt in 1918, against the Qajar dynasty, as the Ottoman’s were fierce rivals of the severely weakened Iranian state, attempted to gain influence over western Iran. Another reason for the Ottoman involvement was motivated by the slaughter of the large Iranian Armenian population in the West Azerbaijan province of Iran. But it was not only the Ottomans that backed these separatist tribal ambitions as Tehran repeatedly called out British influence and support for the tribal rebellions. The British role was mainly motivated by their desire to remove the Qajar dynasty from power and install a new Shah that they could more easily control, thus also triumphing over the Russian Empire in the struggle for influence over Iran.

British intervention in Persia was at its height during the coup d’etat of 1921. Although the coup itself was executed by Persians, it received vital assistance from, and was probably actually initiated by, certain British military officers and officials in Iran, most importantly Major-General Sir Edmund Ironside, Commander of Norperforce, Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Smyth, who was unofficially and “almost secretly” attached to the Cossacks at Qazvin, and Walter A Smart, the Oriental Secretary.

After the coup, Reza Shah Pahlavi, the new Shah of Iran ultimately crushed the Kurdish tribal rebellion and the subsequent ones imitated during 1929 and 1941. It wasn’t until 1946 when the real danger of separatism became prevalent in Iran with the Iranian crisis of 1946 and the aftermath of the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran during WWII. One of the first crises of the Cold War was initiated in 1946 when Stalin refused to relinquish occupied Iranian territory as the Soviets felt that the successor to Reza Shah Pahlavi, his son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, a staunch anti-communist was a danger to Soviet interests, especially with regards to the Truman doctrine. By mid-December 1945, with the use of troops and secret police, they had set up two pro-Soviet “People’s Democratic Republics” in northwestern Iran, the Azerbaijan People’s Republic headed by Sayyid Jafar Pishevari and the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad under Pesheva Qazi Muhammad and Mustafa Barzani, father to current US puppet Mahmoud Barzani who was the previous president of the autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq before last year’s scandalous attempt at independence for the KRG (Kurdish regional government). Though Mustafa Barzani fled Iran and went back to Iraq, so called Marxist oriented parties such as Komala and the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (KDP-I) continued their hostilities not just with the Pahlavi regime but also later on with Islamic Republic after 1979, although these parties moved on from advocating separatism to specific demands and requests. This is due to the relatively low interest in separatism among the Kurdish public in Iran, mainly because of the close cultural, linguistic and historical relations that the Kurdish people and the rest of the Iranian society share.

Kurdish Insurrection after the Islamic Revolution and Israeli activities in western Iran

Since 2004, an armed conflict has been ongoing in the western provinces of Iran between the Iranian government forces and the so called “Party for a free life in Kurdistan” (PJAK). The group is said to be a branch of the PKK terrorist group in Turkey. The group settled in the area controlled by the PKK on the slopes of Mount Qandil, less than 16 kilometres from the Iranian border. Once established at Qandil and operating under the PKK’s security umbrella, the group began conducting sporadic attacks on Iranian border guards and security forces until a ceasefire commenced in 2011.

With the outbreak of the Syrian and Iraqi wars against terrorism, and with Iran focusing heavily on supporting the Syrian and Iraqi governments, the conflict resurged and intensified in 2016, this time with several other Kurdish militant groups also joining in, as US and Israeli support for Kurdish groups across the Middle East escalated. In an obvious show of solidarity with the Zionist state’s growing worries about the JCPOA (Iran Nuclear Deal), the KDP-I stated that it was returning to militancy after two decades of cessation of hostilities: “Since Iran has signed the atomic [nuclear deal] agreement, Iran thinks whatever they do, the outside world does not care. That is why we were forced to choose this approach,” Hassan Sharafi, the deputy leader of the PDKI said. Conveniently for the Zionist state and Washington, PJAK and leftist group Komalah immediately expressed their support for renewed hostilities and began attacking Iranian security forces respectively in the midst of Iran’s struggle against Takfiri terrorists across the region.

The Zionist state has for long had close relations to Kurdish groups across the Middle East as part of their “Alliance of the periphery” doctrine which calls for Israel to develop close strategic alliances with non-Arab Muslim states in the Middle East to counteract the united opposition of Arab states. After the fall of the Iranian monarchy and with Turkey’s recent Islamic resurgence, the strategy is mainly applied towards the Kurdish people, with Israeli government officials providing extensive support to Kurdish political parties and their aspirations for greater self-government and even independence. The government of Iraqi Kurdistan has maintained open ties with Israel and is an influential lobby for the establishment of normal diplomatic relations between Israel and Iraq. Israel remains today the closest regional ally of the YPG forces in Syria as well as the KRG in Iraq.

Documents leaked in 2010 by Wikileaks prove that Israeli Mossad chief Meir Dagan wanted to use Kurds and ethnic minorities to topple the Iranian government. The Israeli spy service wanted to have a weak divided Iran, like in Iraq where the Kurds have their own government, the spy chief told an U.S. official. According to a memo from August 2007, Dagan described to Under-Secretary of State Nicholas Burns the five pillars of Israel’s Iran policy, among them the desire to spark a revolution. The memo noted, ‘instability in Iran is driven by inflation and tension among ethnic minorities. This, Dagan said, “presents unique opportunities, and Israelis and Americans might see a change in Iran in their lifetimes.”

Dagan noted that Iran could end up like Iraq. “As for Iraq, it may end up a weak, federal state comprised of three cantons or entities, one each belonging to the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias.” He added that Iran’s minorities are “raising their heads, and are tempted to resort to violence.”

“It’s Realpolitik. By aligning with the Kurds Israel gains eyes and ears in Iran,” observed a former Israeli intelligence officer. Interestingly, PJAK themselves claim they receive no support from Washington or Tel Aviv. In an interview with Slate magazine in June 2006, PJAK spokesman Ihsan Warya stated that he “nevertheless points out that PJAK really does wish it were an agent of the United States, and that [PJAK is] disappointed that Washington hasn’t made contact.” The Slate article continues stating that the PJAK wishes to be supported by and work with the United States in overthrowing the government of Iran in a similar way to the US eventually cooperated with Kurdish organisations in Iraq in overthrowing the government of Iraq. Surely by now it is no secret that Kurdish chieftains and officials love to be the staunch vassals of Washington and Tel Aviv.

The KRG has even been so generous to offer its territory as a base for Mossad terrorists to launch operations inside Iran. According to several sources, the Mossad operates in the KRG to launch covert operations inside Iran and acquire intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program. “Israeli drones are said to be operating against Iran from bases inside the KRG,” wrote Patrick Seale, a British expert on the Middle East.

The London-based Sunday Times reported that, according to “Western intelligence sources,” during early 2012 Israeli commandos and special forces members carried out missions in Iran that were launched from the KRG. The Zionist terrorists, dressed in Iranian military uniforms, entered Iran in modified Black Hawk helicopters and travelled to Parchin, the site of an Iranian military complex just 30 kilometres southeast of Tehran, and Fordow, an Iranian military base with an underground uranium enrichment facility. The report claims that these forces utilized advanced technology to monitor radioactivity levels and record explosive tests carried out at the military facilities. Whether this report is true or part of a psychological war, I guess we’ll never know.

In addition to all of this, Arab separatism is on the rise in the western Khuzestan province where a large Arab minority reside. The 2018 Ahvaz Military Parade terrorist attack where 29 people were killed was evidence of a recent surge in Arab separatist activities. The Islamic Republic suspects that both Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states offer political and financial support to Arab separatist groups and personalities operating in the West, who in turn funnel the cash to militant networks inside Iran. Suspicions that regional rivals had a hand in the terror attack was intensified by pathetic comments made by Abdul Khaliq Abdullah, a former advisor to the Abu Dhabi Crown Prince, that the Ahvaz attack did not constitute an act of terrorism since it was aimed at a military target. The significance of this inflammatory remark lies in Saudi Crown prince Mohammad Bin Salman’s statement that Saudi Arabia would take the battle “inside” Iran. Since the Saudi monarchy themselves are Zionist agents, we should again look for Washington and Tel Aviv’s hand in this latest campaign targeting yet another minority group in Iran.

The Islamic Republic is under attack from all sides with Washington and Tel Aviv specifically targeting ethnic minorities living in the border areas in the eastern and western regions of Iran. As Washington and Tel Aviv have admitted in the past, a full scale invasion of Iran is highly unlikely due to the size of the country and the large popular support the Islamic Republic enjoys, instead the Zionist Empire has deemed insurgency and fomenting a civil war to be the best way to weaken their adversaries, just like they did in Syria and Iraq. I expect these campaigns to escalate as the Islamic Republic gains more influence across the region and the Zionist Empire growing more and more frustrated each day.

U.S. Continues Supplying Military Aid to Kurdish Forces in Northern Syria against Turkey, a US Ally and NATO Member State

By Firas Samuri
Global Research, April 18, 2019

The mass media has been widely covering the details of the disastrous humanitarian situation in Rukban refugee camp over recent months. By the way, the crisis in other sites deserves more considerable attention. Al-Hol refugee camp located in Al-Hasakah province and run by the Syria Democratic Forces is one of them.

Every single day from 10 to 20 people, mainly women and children die due to the lack of drinking water, essential goods, and medicine. Only for the past two months, 250 children passed away in the camp. According to estimates, now more than 50,000 refugees reside there, although initially it was designed only for 25,000.

It turned out that the catastrophe of Al-Hol residents is caused by the illegal actions of the U.S. authorities. Their homes and shelters in the northern and north-eastern part of Syria have been destroyed by the indiscriminate airstrikes of the U.S.-led international coalition.

Apart from Rukban camp situated in the 55-kilometre zone near Al-Tanf, the American servicemen organized ’humanitarian assistance’ for the people in Al-Hol. However, it is really hard to believe in support of Washington to the locals. On the way to supply their bases in other parts of the country, American trucks allegedly deliver humanitarian aid to the camp. Meanwhile, under the guise of good intentions, weapons and military equipment for Kurdish militias flow from Iraq to Syria.

Since March 1, 2019, the United States has already delivered from Iraq six convoys with 100 Humvee jeeps, 150 pickup trucks equipped with machineguns, as well as small arms and grenade launchers, the local activists report.

In fact, Al-Hol residence received no humanitarian aid, and only a small part of the armament fell into the hands of the American soldiers deployed at Sarrin and Harab Isk military bases in the area of Manbij.

Three-quarters of the shipment was delivered to the Kurdish militias in Al-Hol camp and then moved to the settlements of Tell Abyad and Ras Al Ain at the border with Turkey. According to the Middle East experts, these towns could become the starting point of the Turkish army and its proxies’ large-scale military operation against Kurds in northern Syria.

Amid deterioration of the U.S.-Turkish relations, Washington continues to support SDF, that in response keep holding the oil fields in favour of the United States.

The Turkish side repeatedly expressed concern over the long-term and stable relations between the Americans and Kurds. By the way, the Pentagon has announced the allocation of $ 300 million for the train-and-equip program for the Syrian Democratic Forces. Moreover, half of the budget will be spent on the purchase of military transport.

It was also reported that the number of SDF is planned to be doubled – from 61,000 to 121,000 fighters. Exactly after this announcement, first messages on the forced recruitment in north-eastern Syria appeared.

Based on these data, the version of the secret weapons supply by the U.S. to SDF seems quite reasonable. This armament will be enough to disrupt Ankara offensive and create chaos in the north of Syria. Unfortunately, it is happening under the guise of humanitarian aid delivery to the people in need locked in Al-Hol refugee camp.

*

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

Featured image is from the author

 

Erdogan worked “hand in glove” with ISIS in Syria, claims former emir

‘Islamic State’ terror group liaised directly with Turkish intelligence according to commander

By Nafeez Ahmed

In an explosive interview, a former ISIS commander has claimed that the terror group cooperated directly with Turkish state intelligence agencies for years on areas of “common interest”.

The source said that senior Turkish government officials had numerous meetings with ISIS representatives to coordinate activities and that this also involved providing support and safe harbour to foreign fighters in the country. President Erdogan “was working hand in glove with ISIS” according to the US government counter-terrorism consultants who interviewed the ex-ISIS official.

The relationship raises questions about Turkey’s role as a NATO ally in the Syria conflict.

The source, who served as an ISIS emir for three years, Abu Mansour al Maghrebi, was interviewed by Professor Anne Speckhard, director of the International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism (ICSVE) and a long-time US government counter-terrorism consultant for NATO, the CIA, FBI, State Department and Pentagon, as well as by Dr Ardian Shajkovci, the ICSVE’s director of research.

Although not all of al-Maghrebi’s claims can be verified, most of them are corroborated by the claims of other whistleblowers and former ISIS personnel as previously reported by INSURGE.

Speckhard and Shakovci described Abu Mansour as a sort of ISIS diplomat to Turkey based in Raqqa, Syria.

“My issue[duties] was our [Islamic State’s] relationship with Turkish intelligence. Actually, this started when I was working at the borders,” he explained.

Originally from Morocco, Abu Mansour was an electrical engineer who went to Syria in 2013 to join ISIS. His first job with the terror group involved handling foreign fighters coming to join ISIS via Turkey. This involved liaising with a network of ISIS-paid operatives inside Turkey who would direct fighters from Istanbul to the Turkish border towns of Gaziantep, Antakya, Sanliurfa, and so on.

“Most of them were paid by Dawlah[ISIS],” Abu Mansour said, but said that those working in Turkey were usually motivated by money rather than ideology. But he acknowledged: “Many in Turkey believe and give their bayat[oath of allegiance] to Dawlah. There are ISIS guys living in Turkey, individuals and groups, but no armed groups inside Turkey.”

Abu Mansour later travelled to Raqqa in 2015 where he facilitated Turkish medical treatment of ISIS fighters after high-level meetings with Turkish state intelligence. Abu Mansour claimed to have received his orders straight from Mohamed Hodoud, a representative of ISIS’ Majlis al Shura, and also to have briefly met the terror group’s elusive leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. He told his interviewers:

“There were some agreements and understandings between the Turkish intelligence and ISIS emni about the border gates, for the people who got injured. I had direct meeting with the MIT [the Turkish National Intelligence Organization], many meetings with them.”

He added that these regular meetings occurred between a range of agencies, including Turkish intelligence and the Turkish military:

“There were teams. Some represent the Turkish intel, some represent the Turkish Army. There were teams from 3–5 different groups. Most meetings were in Turkey in military posts or their offices. It depended on the issue. Sometimes we meet each week. It depends on what was going on. Most of the meetings were close to the borders, some in Ankara, some in Gaziantep.”

Abu Mansour described having complete impunity to travel between Syria and Turkey, leading Speckhard to describe him as in effect an ISIS ‘Ambassador’. “I passed the borders and they let me pass”, he said. “[At the border], the Turks always sent me a car and I’m protected. A team of two to three people from our side were with me. I was in charge of our team most of the time.”

Although Abu Mansour denied being a “big guy”, he admitted that his reach on behalf of ISIS potentially extended to President Erdogan himself:

“I was about to meet him but I did not. One of his intelligence officers said Erdogan wants to see you privately but it didn’t happen.”

The interview with Abu Mansour was published on March 18th2019 in Homeland Security Today, the magazine of the Government & Technology Services Coalition (GTSC) — a trade association of CEOs including former US government officials which work in the US national security sector.

A strategic partnership

Abu Mansour argued that his role was to coordinate a relationship between ISIS and Turkey where “both sides benefit.” Abu Mansour said that Turkey saw ISIS as a strategic tool to expand Turkey’s influence in northern Syria as the centre for a renewed empire:

“We are in the border area and Turkey wants to control its borders — to control Northern Syria. Actually they had ambitions not only for controlling the Kurds. They wanted all the north, from Kessab (the most northern point of Syria) to Mosul… This is the Islamists’ ideology of Erdogan. They wanted all of the north of Syria. That is what the Turkish side said [they wanted], to control the north of Syria, because they have their real ambitions. Actually, we talked about what Erdogan said in public [versus what he really desired.] This part of Syria is part of the Ottoman states. Before the agreement following the Second World War, Aleppo and Mosul were part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. The agreement Sykes Picot [in which they lost these regions] was signed for one hundred years. In our meetings, we talked about reestablishing the Ottoman Empire. This was the vision of Turkey.”

Abu Mansour added that although this vision was routinely attributed to Erdogan was not necessarily shared across the Turkish government:

“I cannot say that this is the vision of the whole Turkish government. Many are against interfering to bring this project to reality. They say we will try to defeat the PKK and Kurds. We are afraid of the union between Kurds and that they may make a Kurdish state, but they also expanded to Aleppo… Since they are a NATO state they cannot make NATO angry against them. So, they cannot deal directly with the situation, but they want to destroy the Kurdish ummah, so they deal with the situation [via ISIS] and get benefits from the Islamic State.”

ISIS saw the covert alliance with Turkey as a “big benefit”, as “they could protect our back. Approximately 300 km of our border is with them. Turkey is considered a road for us for medications, food — so many things enter in the name of aid. The gates were open.”

Turkey’s open gate with ISIS

ISIS fighters routinely obtained medical treatment in Turkish hospitals across the border. The Turkish government also supplied water to the terror group and allowed it to sell tens of millions of dollars of oil via Turkey.

“We negotiated to send our fighters to the hospitals [in Turkey]”, said Abu Mansour. “There was facilitation — they didn’t look at the passports of those coming for treatment. It was always an open gate. If we had an ambulance we could cross without question. We could cross [into Turkey] at many places. They don’t ask about official identities. We just have to let them know.”

Turkish state intelligence was intimately involved in this process, he claimed:

“The MIT was made aware of every critical situation and they sent the ambulances to the border. There were also hospitals close to the border. Those who received critical care were treated there and they [the MIT] sent the others all over Turkey depending on their needs. There were very interested doctors, Syrian and Turkish, who wanted to help. So, if there were not facilities to serve them on the border, they would be sent further into Turkey for this.”

Medical bills were largely paid for by ISIS, but “some Turkish public hospitals took these fighters for free. It was not only for our fighters but also for the victims of bombings. I don’t know how many were treated in Turkey, but it was routine… I just know this agreement to open the gates for our wounded and that there were ambulances sent for them. It was a ‘state- to- state’ agreement regarding our wounded. I negotiated these agreements. For the wounded, medical and other supplies to pass, and I negotiated about water also, the Euphrates.”

Water supplied by Turkey allowed ISIS to farm and even generate electricity from dams:

“Actually we [Syria] had an agreement with Turkey for 400 cubic meters per second [of water] into Syria. After the revolution, they started to decrease the quantity of water to 150 cubic meters per second. After our negotiations [in 2014] it returned to 400. We needed it for electrical power and as a vital source of living.”

ISIS water agreement with Turkey “took a long time to negotiate,” according to Abu Mansour. In return ISIS gave the Turkish government guarantees that the country would be “safe and stable” from ISIS attack. “In negotiations I could not say I would attack Turkey. This is the language of gangs, but I would say we will try to keep Turkey from the field battle, we will not see Turkey as an enemy. They understood what we are talking about. We said many times, ‘You are not our enemy and not our friend.’”

Abu Mansour further claimed Turkey was the primary conduit for ISIS oil sales: “Most of the Syrian oil was going to Turkey, and just small amounts went to the Bashar regime…. This happened spontaneously. There are many traders to do that and Turkey was the only market in which to send oil. Their traders paid for the oil that went into Turkey.”

Most of these deals occurred via Turkish middleman who were sanctioned by the authorities:

“Oil that went to the Syrian government — some went by pipes, some by trucks. Oil sent by Dawlah [ISIS] to Turkey was arranged by traders from Turkey who came to take the oil with our permissions. Traders came from the Syrian side also.”

Oil sales via Turkey, Abu Mansour confirmed, were instrumental in bankrolling ISIS’ military onslaught. “In Syria the oil was enough to pay for the weapons and everything needed,” he said. “[Our oil revenues] were more than 14 million dollars per month and half of this oil money is more than enough to pay for everything needed for our weapons expenditures.”

These claims lend credence to an earlier INSURGE investigation into ISIS oil sales which raised questsions not just about Turkish state complicity, but also that of a number of Iraqi Kurdish and Western companies.

However, Abu Mansour denied that ISIS received weapons or funding directly from Turkey. Instead he claimed that weapons were routinely obtained by ISIS from sources inside armed opposition groups: “Anti-government Syrian people provided us with weapons; many mafias and groups traded weapons to us.”

A familiar story

Abu Mansour’s claims about Turkish military intelligence’s direct support for ISIS have been corroborated by other sources. In 2016, I interviewed Ahmet Sait Yayla, Chief of the Counter-Terrorism and Operations Division of Turkish National Police between 2010 and 2012, who went on to become Chief of the Public Order and Crime Prevention Division until 2014.

Yayla told me in extensive detail how he had witnessed first-hand that his own police counter-terrorism operations were scuppered due to Turkish intelligence liaisons which protected ISIS fighters, routinely granted them free passage in and out of Turkey, and provided them medical treatment in Turkish hospitals.

He had however gone much further in describing how he had seen evidence of direct Turkish military and financial sponsorship for some ISIS operations. Yayla’s detailed testimony suggests that Abu Mansour’s role as chief negotiator with Turkish intelligence did not cover certain key strategic issues such as direct military and financial support, which would explain why Abu Mansour was not aware of it.

My story on Yayla was banned in a Turkish court order last year sent to US tech and social media companies.

INSURGE has previously reported other emerging evidence from Western intelligence sources indicating Turkish state complicity in the expansion of ISIS across Syria.

The new revelations reinforce questions about why Western governments have ignored the evidence of state-sponsorship of ISIS — within NATO no less — despite international laws requiring firm action against entities found to be supporting terrorism.

The double game

In 2014, Abu Mansour alleges that Turkey was allowing foreign fighters into Syria while pretending to take measures against them:

“Turkey wanted to make it easy for foreign fighters to cross the borders… They just want to control, they need to be known, and how they enter, so they ask me to tell who has entered and where. Actually, the Turkish side said, ‘You should reduce, change the way you do it, the way you cross. For example, don’t come with a group to enter because it’s clear that a bunch of people entered. Enter only specific gates. Come without any weapons. Don’t come with long beards. Your entry from north to south should be hidden as much as possible.’”

Once again, Turkish intelligence was directly involved: “[In 2014,] they opened some legal gates under the eye of Turkish intel that our people went in and out through. But, entry into Syria was easier than return to Turkey. Turkey controlled the movements.”

ISIS terrorist attacks in Turkey orchestrated by Turkish MIT agents?

Perhaps Abu Mansour’s most controversial claim is that ISIS attacks inside Turkey — on Istanbul airport, at the Reina nightclub and on the streets in Ankara and Istanbul — were not in ISIS’ own interests, but were likely carried out under the orders of Turkish intelligence officers who had infiltrated ISIS:

“The ISIS external emni ordered it. And I think that there were Turkish MIT guys inside the external emni. I suspected that the striking at the airport was not for the benefit of IS, but Turkish groups of IS who wanted to strike Turkey, or they were affected by other agencies that don’t want a relationship between Dawlahand Turkey. It makes no sense, otherwise, because most of our people came through that airport.”

His explanation for this is that the orders for the attack did not come from ISIS leadership proper, but from Turkish MIT officers:

“These orders for these attacks in Turkey were from those MIT guys inside Dawlah but not from our political side. They didn’t want to destroy Erdogan, just change his road in the matter of the Syrian issue. They wanted him to use his army to attack Syria, and to attack Dawlah. The airport attack makes a good excuse for him to come into Syria.”

To be sure, there is no way to independently verify Abu Mansour’s extraordinary allegations against Turkish state intelligence, but they are partly corroborated by the claims of another former ISIS operative, Savas Yildas, who was captured by the YPG during the ISIS attack on the Kurdish province of Gire Spi (Tel Abyad) in Syria. Abu Mansour added that during his imprisonment in Kurdish YPG prisons, he had heard “that the Turkish government, after they were in Raqqa, took 40 persons out that were part of Turkish security agencies.”

The new revelations contradict years of a conventional narrative which has portrayed ISIS as a spontaneous movement erupting without significant state support.

Turkey is hardly the only state which Western intelligence agencies knew were financing ISIS — others include Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

%d bloggers like this: