SYRIAN WAR REPORT – SEPTEMBER 20, 2019: RUSSIA GAVE SYRIA ‘GREEN LIGHT’ TO USE S-300

South Front

On September 19, the Syrian Air Defense Forces shot down an unidentified unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) over the town of Aqraba, south of Damascus. Pro-government sources claim that the intercepted UAV was likely operated by Israel.

On August 25, two Hezbollah members were killed by Israeli strikes in the same area. These strikes and the incident with Israeli drones in Beirut led to a local escalation between Hezbollah and the Israeli military at the Lebanese-Israeli contact line on September 1. Since then and until September 19, the situation around Damascus and in southern Lebanon have remained relatively calm.

The al-Qaeda-affiliated militant coalition Wa Harid al-Muminin announced that its forces had shelled positions of the Syrian Army near the area of al-Mashari’a. In a separate development, Idlib militants shelled the Abu al-Duhur humanitarian corridor with mortars in an attempt to prevent civilians from leaving the militant-held area.

On September 18, the joint Russia-Syria Coordination Center on Refugee Repatriation announced that work to resettle refugees from the Rukban camp the US-controlled zone of al-Tanf will begin late on September 27. During the last two years, the camp was in a constant state of humanitarian crisis due to the lack of aid, clean water and food. Nonetheless, the US-led coalition and coalition-backed militants sabotaged previous attempts to evacuate civilians from it.

Russia has given Syria a green light to use the S-300 missile defense system against Israeli targets, according to reports in Russian media citing own sources. Reports claim that the Syrian military received permission to use its air defense systems in response to Israeli actions. However, in this case the Syrian side would bear full responsibility for such a move.

Since the start of the week, positions of Iranian-backed forces near al-Bukamal have come under at least two aerial attacks that are commonly attributed by Israel. Some mainstream media speculated that the September 18 strike may have been delivered by the Saudi Air Force. However, this version was immediately denounced by Saudi Arabia itself.

SYRIAN ARMY INTERCEPTS ARMED, BOOBY-TRAPPED DRONE NEAR ISRAELI-OCCUPIED GOLAN HEIGHTS (PHOTOS)

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) brought down on September 21 a large quad-copter unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) near the separation line with the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

Syrian Army Intercepts Armed, Booby-Trapped Drone Near Israeli-Occupied Golan Heights (Photos)

Click to see full-size image

According to the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), the army was able to take control of the hostile UAV and land it once it reached the town of Erneh, 8km north of the separation line. Electronic warfare means were apparently used to control the UAV.

“While inspecting and disassembling the UAV by specialized engineer teams, it became clear that it was armed with submunitions on top of being booby-trapped with a C4 explosive charge, in order to prevent its dismantling and protect its secrets,” a security source told the SANA.

The state-run agency said that the UAV came from the western direction. The SAA controls the entire region, while Hezbollah controls the nearby Lebanese villages. This suggest that the UAV came from the Israeli-occupied areas in northwestern Golan.

Photos of the UAV reveal that it was armed with two small-diameter submunitions, both equipped with a parachute.

Syrian Army Intercepts Armed, Booby-Trapped Drone Near Israeli-Occupied Golan Heights (Photos)

Click to see full-size image

Syrian Army Intercepts Armed, Booby-Trapped Drone Near Israeli-Occupied Golan Heights (Photos)

Click to see full-size image

Syrian Army Intercepts Armed, Booby-Trapped Drone Near Israeli-Occupied Golan Heights (Photos)

Click to see full-size image

Syrian Army Intercepts Armed, Booby-Trapped Drone Near Israeli-Occupied Golan Heights (Photos)

Click to see full-size image

Last month, two quad-copters equipped with explosive devices attacked a center of Hezbollah in Beirut’s Southern Suburb. The incident was blamed on Israel, which appears to be using such drones in its covert operations.

SYRIAN ARMY SHOOTS DOWN ARMED DRONE NEAR HELICOPTER BASE IN NORTHWESTERN HAMA

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) shot down on September 21 an armed unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) that attempted to attack its positions in northwestern Hama.

Local sources said that the UAV was shot down near the town of Jubb Ramlah. The drone was reportedly armed with several munitions.

The UAV was likely heading to attack a large helicopter base of the Syrian Arab Air Force (SyAAF) to the west of Jubb Ramlah. The base has been supporting the SAA’s operations in Greater Idlib for months now.

Syrian Army Shoots Down Armed Drone Near Helicopter Base In Northwestern Hama

Click to see full-size image. Via Google Earth.

No side has claimed responsibility for the failed attack, so far. However, al-Qaeda-affiliated Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) is known for manufacturing and operating this kind of armed UAVs.

The failed attack is a violation of the current ceasefire. Such provocations could force the SAA to resume its ground offensive in Greater Idlib.

Related

Advertisements

Israel’s Latest Strikes in Syria Prove that the US-Russia-Israel Jerusalem National Security Summit Was a Success: Thus Claimed Andrew Korybko

 

 

Comment By UP

Contrary to Andrew Korybko’s claim “Israel’s Latest Strikes in Syria Prove that the US-Russia-Israel Jerusalem National Security Summit” was a failure.

A real political analyst should know that Russia is in Syria to fight terrorism, not “Israel”, to help Syria to defend itself, and liberate every inch of Syrian territories. 

Russia never claimed that its part of the resistance axis. Nor claimed that its in Syria to liberate, by force, Palestinian and Syrian territories occupied in 1967 war. The defeated anglozionist empire in Syria is ready to accept the Syrian victory, if Iran Iran and allies leave Syria, and Russia has no means help in that. Most likely Russia told its partners in the “US-Russia-Israel Jerusalem National Security Summit”: If you want Iran’s and allies to leave Syria, you should leave Golan Heights and and accept a Palestinian state in Gaza and occupied west bank,

Moreover, I would draw the readers attention to the following facts:

  1. Resistance axis consists mainly of Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and allies in Lebanon, Palestinian resistance , Ansarallah in Yemen and IRAQI POPULAR MOBILIZATION.
  2. In July war, Syria was not involved directly in confronting the Israeli aggression, because Hezbollah was not in need for such involvement, the same applies to Israeli wars on Gaza.

However, if the Anglo-Zionist Empire dared to attack Iran, Russia shall not fight, but shall provide all means Iran may need to help Iran to defend itself. Sayyed Nasrallah was crystal clear, when he said on Al-quds day:

“The US knows well that any war on Iran will not remain confined to Iran’s borders. The entire region will burn, leading to all US forces and interests in the region being annihilated,”

—–

Israel’s Latest Strikes in Syria Prove that the US-Russia-Israel Jerusalem National Security Summit Was a Success

Global Research, July 01, 2019

There’s no more convincing proof that last week’s historic National Security Summit in Jerusalem between Russia, “Israel”, and the US was a success than the self-professed “Jewish State’s” latest anti-Iranian strikes in Syria, which were more than likely approved  by Moscow in advance as part of its regional “balancing” strategy in pursuit of a “New Detente”.

Israel” carried out several strikes against what media reports allege were IRGC bases in Syria around midnight on 1 July, defying popular expectations that this wouldn’t happen ever again after Russia gave some very high-profile but nevertheless misleading statements about its supposedly “allied” commitment to Iran the week prior. The historic National Security Advisor Summit in Jerusalem between Russia, “Israel”, and the US was widely described as a failure after Moscow defended Tehran’s military presence in the Arab Republic and reaffirmed that the two are “allies”, but that doesn’t tell the full story because Russian Security Council Secretary Patrushev was only talking about their anti-terrorist cooperation in Syria and didn’t mean anything more broadly than that.

The same goes for the Russian Foreign Ministry’s envoy to Asian countries and in particular the presidential advisor on Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov’s promise a few days later that Iran “won’t be alone” if the US attacks it. Alt-Media interpreted this through its members’ typical wishful thinking perspective to mean that Russia was implying a direct military intervention against the US in support of Iran if a conflict were to break out, when in reality he was most likely talking about the political and moral support that the rest of the world would extend to the Islamic Republic in that scenario. Shortly after, a Russian official told Sputnik that “we are open to discussions” with Iran about selling it the S-400s, which was also wrongly reported in the outlet’s own headline as “Russia ready to deliver S-400 to Iran” when it literally only signaled its interest in starting talks about this.

The combination of Patrushev, Kabulov, and the military-technical official’s statements created the false perception that Russia would militarily defend its Iranian “ally”, which is why many people were so surprised when “Israel” just carried out several strikes against its forces in Syria. Not only that, but the S-300s once again failed to respond, confirming that they’re just status symbols worshiped by those who suffer from a “savior complex”. The latest attacks were particularly painful for those who sincerely thought that Russia would prevent this from happening since some of them targeted the Homs Governorate close to where the S-300s are reportedly located in neighboring Hama Governorate’s nearby city of Masyaf, sending the clear-cut message that Moscow won’t let them be used against “Putinyahu’s Rusrael“.

As the shock of what happened begins to set in, the Alt-Media Community would do well to remember that none other than Bibi himself spilled the beans about what was about to happen just days before the strikes took place when he said that “all of us (Russia, “Israel”, and the US) agree on the end goal of getting Iran out of Syria” when briefing his compatriots on the outcome of the National Security Advisor Summit. Many people mocked him at the time and dismissed his comment as nothing more than Zionist boasting, but he was actually telling the truth in hindsight as proven by the fact that Russia once again  “passively facilitated” “Israel’s” anti-Iranian strikes in Syria, shattering the worldview of those who fell for Moscow’s messaging in the days prior. In fact, one can’t help but wonder whether that said messaging was designed to cover up a deal that it struck.

To elaborate, the three quoted Russian officials were uncharacteristically enthusiastic about their support of Iran, which should have immediately been a dead-giveaway to keen observers that something was up. Furthermore, the fact that Alt-Media didn’t report on the entirety of Patrushev’s comments from that event, especially about how “Russia puts special attention on ensuring Israel’s security“, should have been another sign that a perception management operation was in progress. More than likely, Russia wanted to capitalize on the outpouring of global support for Iran after it downed an American drone earlier that week and misportray itself as the Islamic Republic’s loyal “ally” in order to redirect some of the sympathy towards its Mideast policy as well, all of which would make “Israel’s” forthcoming strikes all the more unexpected.

It’s doubtful that Iranian decision makers fell for this perception management operation that was probably mostly targeting the general audience at large and not the strategic one in the Islamic Republic, but then again, Tehran still can’t seem to accept that India has turned against it so it’s theoretically possible that it also didn’t see this coming either. That said, many Iranians have reportedly been killed over nearly the past four years since Russia militarily intervened in Syria and began to “passively facilitate” “Israel’s” strikes there, so it would be strange for them to think that this would change after what Patrushev said at the historic Jerusalem Summit about ensuring “Israel’s” security, which is nothing more than a euphemism for continuing to allow it to bomb the IRGC in Syria.

Given what just took place, there’s no doubt that the National Security Advisor Summit in Jerusalem was a success in more ways than one. Not only did Russia apparently approve — if not coordinate — “Israel’s” latest strikes (and likely the many more that will occur in the coming future) as part of its regional “balancing” strategy aimed at “passively facilitating” Iran’s dignified but “phased withdrawal” from Syria as a quid pro quo for clinching a “New Detente” with the US, but Moscow’s messaging strategy also succeeded in managing international perceptions and obscuring its behind-the-scenes role in the latest attacks. Altogether, all of this works out very well for Netanyahu’s upcoming re-election campaign and it’s predicted that he’ll continue striking the IRGC in Syria with Putin’s tacit approval in the run-up to September’s vote.

*

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.

This article was originally published on Eurasia Future.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from @Ibra_Joudeh/Twitter

Moscow’s Strategy: To Win Everywhere, Every Time

Moscow’s Strategy: To Win Everywhere, Every Time

Moscow’s Strategy: To Win Everywhere, Every Time

Important events have occurred in the Middle East and North Africa in recent weeks that underline how the overall political reconfiguration of the region is in full swing. The Shia axis (Axis of Resistance) continues its diplomatic relations and, following Rouhani’s meeting in Baghdad, it was the turn of Adil Abdul-Mahdi to be received in Tehran by the highest government and religious authorities. Among the many statements released, two in particular reveal the high level of cooperation between the two countries, as well as demonstrating how the Shia axis (Axis of Resistance) is in full bloom, carrying significant prospects for the region. Abdul-Mahdi also reiterated that Iraq will not allow itself to be used as a platform from which to attack Iran:

“Iraqi soil will not be allowed to be used by foreign troops to launch any attacks against Iran. The plan is to export electricity and gas for other countries in the region.”

Considering that these two countries were mortal enemies during Saddam Hussein’s time, their rapprochement is quite a (geo)political miracle, owing much of its success to Russia’s involvement in the region. The 4+1 coalition (Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria plus Hezbollah) and the anti-terrorism center in Baghdad came about as a result of Russia’s desire to coordinate all the allied parties in a single front. Russia’s military support of Syria, Iraq and Hezbollah (together with China’s economic support) has allowed Iran to begin to transform the region such that the Shia axis (Axis of Resistance) can effectively counteract the destabilizing chaos unleashed by the trio of the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel.

One of the gaps to be filled in the Shia axis (Axis of Resistance) lies in Lebanon, which has long experienced an internal conflict between the many religious and political currents in the country. The decision by Washington to recognize the Golan Heights as part of Israel pushed the Lebanese president, Michel Aoun, to make an important symbolic visit to Moscow to meet with President Putin.

Once again, the destabilizing efforts of the Saudis, Israelis and Americans are having the unintended effect of strengthening the Shia axis (Axis of Resistance). It seems that this trio fails to understood how such acts as murdering Khashoggi, using civilian planes to hide behind in order to conduct bombing runs in Syria, recognizing the occupied territories like the Golan Heights – how these produce the opposite effects to the ones desired.

The supply of S-300 systems to Syria after the downing of the Russian reconnaissance plane took place as a result of Tel Aviv failing to think ahead and anticipate how Russia may respond.

What is surprising in Moscow’s actions is the versatility of its diplomacy, from the deployment of the S-300s in Syria, or the bombers in Iran, to the prompt meetings with Netanyahu in Moscow and Mohammad bin Salman at the G20. The ability of the Russian Federation to mediate and be present in almost every conflict on the globe restores to the country the international stature that is indispensable in counterbalancing the belligerence of the United States.

The main feature of Moscow’s approach is to find areas of common interest with its interlocutor and to favor the creation of trade or knowledge exchange. Another military and economic example can be found in a third axis; not the Shia or Saudi-Israeli-US one but the Turkish-Qatari one. In Syria, Erdogan started from positions that were exactly opposite to those of Putin and Assad. But with decisive military action and skilled diplomacy, the creation of the Astana format between Iran, Turkey and Russia made Turkey and Qatar publicly take the defense of Islamist takfiris and criminals in Idlib. Qatar for its part has a two-way connection with Turkey, but it is also in open conflict with the Saudi-Israeli axis, with the prospect of abandoning OPEC within a few weeks. This situation has allowed Moscow to open a series of negotiations with Doha on the topic of LNG, with these two players controlling most of the LNG on the planet. It is evident that also the Turkish-Qatari axis is strongly conditioned by Moscow and by the potential military agreements between Turkey and Russia (sale of S-400) and economic and energy agreements between Moscow and Doha.

America’s actions in the region risks combining the Qatari-Turkish front with the Shia axis (Axis of Resistance) , again thanks to Moscow’s skilful diplomatic work. The recent sale of nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, together with the withdrawal from the JCPOA (the Iranian nuclear agreement), has created concern and bewilderment in the region and among Washington’s allies. The act of recognizing the occupied Golan Heights as belonging to Israel has brought together the Arab world as few events have done in recent times. Added to this, Trump’s open complaints about OPEC’s high pricing of oil has forced Riyadh to start wondering out aloud whether to start selling oil in a currency other than the dollar. This rumination was quickly denied, but it had already been aired. Such a decision would have grave implications for the petrodollar and most of the financial and economic power of the United States.

If the Shia axis (Axis of Resistance), with Russian protection, is strengthened throughout the Middle East, the Saudi-Israel-American triad loses momentum and falls apart, as seen in Libya, with Haftar now one step closer in unifying the country thanks to the support of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, France and Russia, with Fayez al-Sarraj now abandoned by the Italians and Americans awaiting his final defeat.

While the globe continues its multipolar transformation, the delicate balancing role played by Russia in the Middle East and North Africa is emphasized. The Venezuelan foreign minister’s recent visit to Syria shows how the front opposed to US imperialist bullying is not confined to the Middle East, with countries in direct or indirect conflict with Washington gathering together under the same protective Sino-Russian umbrella.

Trump’s “America First” policy, coupled with the conviction of American exceptionalism, is driving international relations towards two poles rather than multipolar ones, pushing China, Russia and all other countries opposed to the US to unite in order to collectively resist US diktats.

SYRIAN WAR REPORT – FEB. 19-20, 2019: TOP MILITANT COMMANDER IS IN COMA AFTER BLAST IN IDLIB

South Front

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham leader Abu Muhammad Al-Joulani received a shell fragment wound to the head in an explosion in Idlib city on February 18 and was evacuated to a hospital in Antakya in the Turkish province of Hatay, Russian state media reported on February 19 citing a Turkish medical source. According to the report, the terrorist group’s leader is in a coma.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda) has not commented on these claims so far. The terrorist organization is currently the most influential “opposition group” within the Idlib de-escalation zone. It controls about 80% of the area despite the fact that it’s formally excluded from the ceasefire regime.

If Abu Muhammad Al-Joulani is in fact severely injured, this may open an opportunity for Turkish proxies to reclaim at least a part of the area in the Idlib de-escalation zone from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Then, they would be able to continue pretending that there are still some moderate rebels in the area. This is in the interests of Ankara. Some experts already speculated that Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization may have staged this incident in an attempt to bring the situation in Idlib under its control.

In the countryside of Damacsus, pro-government forces seized a large number of weapons and ammunition, including hundreds of Grad rockets and a large number of US made anti-tank missiles and Israeli 128 mm rockets, in the framework of the ongoing security operation in the area.

On February 19, Israel’s Image Sat International company released a fresh satellite image showing positions of the Syrian military’s S-300 system in the area of Masyaf. According to the provided image and the company’s assessment, three of four S-300 launchers are “probably” operational.

Previous satellite images of Masyaf were released by the same company on February 5. This was the first image showing S-300 launchers in an upright position. Therefore, it was suggested that the Russia-supplied system was becoming operational.

While the ISIS-held pocket in the Euphrates Valley is still not fully eliminated, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have already started preparations for a new round of Syria standoff. Recently, the group released a new statement in which it:

  • claimed that it will work to eliminate existing ISIS cells;
  • described Turkey as an occupier, but declared readiness to resolve the issues with Ankara via negotiations;
  • said that it’s ready for the establishment of a safe area in northeastern Syria under “international supervision”;
  • said that it’s ready for negotiations with Damascus, but that the Syrian government should take into account the SDF’s specificity and recognize the “self-declared and effective autonomy in the northeast”;
  • and in which it vowed to recapture Afrin.

The content and working of the statement shows that the SDF is no longer expecting a rapid and inevitable US forces withdrawal from the war-torn country. So, it has once again hardened its stance towards other key players and started speaking in the language of ultimatums.

Related Videos

Related News

SYRIAN WAR REPORT – FEB. 5-8, 2019: RUSSIAN-SUPPLIED S-300 SYSTEM BECOMING OPERATIONAL

South Front

On February 5, Israel’s ImageSat International company released satellite images showing positions of the Russia-supplied S-300 air defense system in Syria’s Masyaf. The released image shows 3 of the 4 launchers in an upright position and the fourth covered by a camouflage net. This was the first satellite image showing the launchers in an erected position since their arrival from Russia in October 2018. This may indicate that the system is about to become or has already become operational.

Earlier, Russian media reported that the S-300 system will become combat ready in March 2019 after Syrian S-300 crews would finish their training. However, it is possible that the training course was intensified because of a tense situation in the region.

On February 7, the Russian state-run TV network RT reported citing military sources that Iranian forces preparing to move their weapons supply center from the Damascus international airport to the T4 airbase in the province of Homs. The T4 airbase is currently being used by Iranian forces for operations involving unnamed aerial vehicles.

At the same time, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper released a satellite image showing the alleged positions of Iranian forces in Damascus airport and also claimed that the forces are preparing to withdraw to the T4 airbase.

Iran provides very little details on its operations in Syria. However, even if these reports are confirmed, this would not mean that Syria and Iran are limiting their military cooperation. Iranian positions in the Damascus International Airport area have been repeatedly targeted by the Israeli Air Force since the start of the conflict. So, the redeployment of Iranian forces may be an attempt to de-escalate the situation in the countryside of the Syrian capital.

On February 7, the 1st division of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) ambushed a group of ISIS fighters in the Damascus desert killing at least 6 of them. According to a military source, the group was likely carrying out a reconnaissance operation in order to prepare for terrorist attacks.

The 45th Brigade of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) launched 50 rockets at positions of ISIS around the town of al-Baghuz al-Fawqani in the middle Euphrates River Valley. According to the PMU, the strikes were aimed at preventing ISIS terrorists from entering Iraq.

The US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are currently finalizing their operation against ISIS in the area. However, a large number of terrorists still control a chunk of the SDF-besieged area.

Related News

آذار شهر ساخن إقليمياً… فيه تتجمّع الاستحقاقات

يناير 24, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– تبلّغ المعنيون في لبنان والعراق أن عليهم ملاقاة شهر آذار بحكومات مكتملة، لأن الآتي صعب وخطير والتطوّرات الإقليمية ستكون شديدة السخونة، حيث التسويات صعبة ومعقدة، والحرب المفتوحة غير واردة، والمعادلة الأميركية الإسرائيلية تنطلق من استحالتين. الاستحالة الأولى هي التعايش مع تنامي محور المقاومة وتماسكه وامتلاكه المزيد من أسباب القوة الجغرافية والعسكرية والتسليحية، بصورة تجعل أي تسوية ترسخ الانتصار السوري بصيغة توازناته الراهنة خطراً مباشراً لا تستطيع «إسرائيل» تحمّل تبعاته، أما الاستحالة الثانية فهي العجز عن منع هذا المشهد الدراماتيكي بمواجهة جذرية مباشرة تستند إلى استخدام القوة العسكرية، وهو ما كان متاحاً في ظروف أفضل قبل معركة حلب أو قبل معركة الغوطة أو قبل معركة جنوب سورية. وبين هاتين الاستحالتين يجري ما يُسمّى عسكرياً التقرّب المتبادل إلى خط الاشتباك في «المناطق الحرام»، أملاً بأن يلعب التقرّب دور الردع عن تقرّب مقابل. وهذا يعني الرهان أن يكون آخر خطوة تقرب للجانب الأميركي الإسرائيلي من دون أن تقابلها خطوة موازية من محور المقاومة، فترتسم قواعد الاشتباك الجديدة عند هذا الحد من التقابل وجهاً لوجه من دون الدخول في المواجهة.

– اللحظة التي ستصل فيها الخطوات المتقابلة تبدو مقبلة في آذار، وموعد النقلة الأخيرة التي سيبنى عليها التوازن شبه النهائي هي تلك التي سيفرضها تبادل الخطوات بعد أقلّ من شهرين. ففي آذار ستكون المهلة الأخيرة لتبلور البدائل العسكرية التي ستخلف الانسحاب الأميركي من الحدود السورية التركية، لأن الأكيد أن نيسان هو شهر الانسحاب، فهل ستذهب تركيا للمخاطرة باللعب بالنار وتقع في الفخ الأميركي وتتسلّم من واشنطن مواقع حدودية تضعها خارج مسار أستانة مع روسيا وإيران وتعيدها إلى ما قبل معركة حلب، وتواجه خطر الوقوع في مواجهة كبرى عملت المستحيل لتفاديها، أم تلتزم نصائح الرئيس الروسي بالعودة إلى اتفاق أضنة الذي كان ينظم الوضع الحدودي بين الدولتين السورية والتركية، مع عرض الرعاية الروسية هذه المرّة، وفي آذار موعد الانتخابات الإسرائيلية المبكرة التي فرض موعدها الفشل في حرب غزة الأخيرة، ويريدها نتنياهو تجديداً لزعامته ويضع العمليات داخل الأراضي السورية عنواناً لتحقيق هذا الهدف، ويجعل إيران ومواجهتها عنوان حملته الانتخابية. وقد جاءه رد الجنرال قاسم سليماني، الذي وعد نتنياهو بردّ مقبل يقطع عليه حلم العودة إلى رئاسة الحكومة. وفي آذار كما قالت صحيفة كومرسانت الروسية نقلاً عن مصادر عسكرية ستكون شبكة صواريخ الـ«أس 300» التي سلّمت لسورية قد وضعت قيد التشغيل. وقد سمعت «إسرائيل» كلام الدبلوماسي السوري الدكتور بشار الجعفري من منبر الأمم يطرح معادلة مطار تل أبيب مقابل مطار دمشق، ومعلوم أن كلام الجعفري تمهيد جدّي للمعادلة التي قال رئيس أركان جيش الاحتلال إنها فرضية لا يمكن تجاهلها. فلدى سورية ما يسمح لها بترجمتها، والجعفري لا يلقي الكلام على عواهنه.

– معادلات الردع تتحضر لاختبار ساخن لترسم قواعد الاشتباك الجديدة، وآذار موعد غير بعيد، والرهان الأميركي على مواجهة من طرف عنوانها الحرب المالية مع تبريد الجبهات العسكرية التي ثبت أن اليد العليا فيها لخصومها، سيبقى حلماً غير قابل للتحقق. فمحور المقاومة وقادته يعرفون نقاط قوتهم ونقاط ضعفهم، كما نقاط قوة وضعف معسكر أعدائهم، وما قد يفاجئ الإسرائيليين أن المواجهات المقبلة قد يحين أوانها بينما تكون أميركا منشغلة بالحريق الذي أشعلته في فنزويلا والذي قد يمتدّ إلى كل أميركا الجنوبية.

Related Videos

 

Disparity of security necessities among allies America, Turkey, Europe, and Israel تفاوت مقتضيات الأمن بين الحلفاء: أميركا وتركيا وأوروبا و«إسرائيل»

Disparity of security necessities among allies America, Turkey, Europe, and Israel

يناير 15, 2019

Written by Nasser Kandil,

It is surprising that some analysts in the world and the region accept to consider the decision of the US President’s withdrawal from Syria as an expression of the mood of Donald Trump. The issue is not in discussing the presidential powers constitutionally; rather it is the ability of the President to deal practically alone with such decision. The US debate about the benefit of the military presence in Syria is neither new, nor governed by considerations related to Syria alone. The principle of the withdrawal from the whole Asian mainland was in circulation in the US decision-making centers for ten years after Baker Hamiliton report 2006 and after the decision of the President Obama in 2010 to withdraw from Iraq in 2011 and the deadline to withdraw from Afghanistan in 2013, which was extended twice to 2016 and to the end of 2018 according to the requirements of the war on Syria and the new bets to win it.

The absolute American consensus on refusing the engagement in a military confrontation with Russia and Iran led to the thinking of how to manage the failure in wars between narrow equations, their first aspect is the turning into a boxing bag that receives blows respectively without a decision to go to war, while their second aspect is the withdrawal, imposing sanctions, and linking the engagement into settlements with conditions that meet the US interests. This aspect is more effective than the military presence according to many in Washington. Since the Battle of Aleppo and the fall of the bet on the Turkish disruption of the geographical expansion of the Syrian army supported by Russia, Iran, and the resistance forces the US decision of withdrawal has become ready, but it was delayed by another bet entitled Saudi-Israeli bilateral that is militarily capable of blowing in Syria and Yemen, and able to launch a political qualitative path entitled ending the Palestinian cause through the deal of the century that besieges Iran and the resistance forces in order to make a settlement with Russia that ends with the exit of Iran and the resistance forces from Syria as a condition for its stability and the Western involvement.

With the emergence of the limited Israeli ability to protect the aggressive interventions on Syria after the Russia decisions to deploy the S-300 missiles network, the development of the Syrian ability to combat the Israeli raids, the abject failure of Saudi Arabia in the war on Yemen and its turning into a burden militarily and politically, the fall of the bet on the credibility of the success of the deal of century in finding a Palestinian partner, the emergence of a collective Palestinian will to refuse it, and the expansion of the popular and military Palestinian resistance movement and its imposing new equations, America had to decide to stay militarily face –to-face against Russia, Iran, and Syria in protecting the project of the Kurdish secession, although this project provokes a crisis with Turkey, the Atlantic ally of Washington, but it wants to protect the Israeli desire to barter the US withdrawal with the Iranian withdrawal.

The years of war led by Washington on Syria and its failure led to disparity in the requirements of security between it and its allies. Europe’s understanding of the concept of security starts with the issue of the displaced and the threat of its targeting through the infiltration of terrorists groups from the burning Middle East, while it ends with the concern about any open confrontation with Iran, whether through its military repercussions or its risks to the energy market. Europe did not hesitate to talk publicly about the US policies as a source of concern, whether through the withdrawal from the nuclear understanding with Iran or in managing the Palestinian cause. Turkey tried to search for new positioning that expresses its privacies; it found in Astana path its target through the cooperation with Russia and Iran and what was called by the Turks as the “Third option”. Therefore, the Turkish role in Syria was linked with a ceiling entitled “the concept of the national security” that considers the American –Kurdish relationship the first danger.

Washington lost its European and Turkish allies, while it stoke to its Saudi and Israeli allies. It found that it has to pay costly bills with imminent benefits, the most prominent of which is the American security which starts from Afghanistan. The American intervention was not as tactical as the American presence in Syria. Moreover, the condition of the Iranian cooperation with the requirements of the American security in Afghanistan in ensuring a secure withdrawal is governed by a political equation that was set at the Russian-Chinese- Pakistani- Iranian- Afghani meeting three weeks ago and which was related to the abandonment of the insistence on the Iranian withdrawal from Syria. This led to a set of American decisions under the title of a new concept of the national security that is not governed by the Saudi and Israeli ceilings, rather it sees that the security of Israel and Saudi Arabia is something and the concept of security according to Saudi Arabia and Israel is something else. The Yemeni settlement was the most prominent outcome of these decisions, because it means the acceptance of Iranian gains in the Gulf. This step has been followed by the withdrawal from Syria under the title of handing over the security in the Asian mainland to Russia to ensure the security of Israel and Saudi Arabia which differs from the concept of security to Israel and Saudi Arabia, this will be illustrated later maybe through the withdrawal from Iraq, and then American strict administration of the  negotiation on settlements and lifting of sanctions  and the moving to fight from inside the political and economic structures resulting from settlements.

It is a new stage in the crystallization of the new concepts of security, where the West is no longer a west and the Atlantic is no longer the Atlantic, rather they are separated issues according to interests, where Europe as Turkey has privacies and where Iran as a European and Turkish necessity it turned into American necessity in Afghanistan despite the Saudi and Israeli reservations. It is important to understand the speech of the Turkish President about the turning of the challenge of the American sanctions on Iran into an opportunity for negotiations between them and where Turkey is betting on playing a role of mediator in.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

تفاوت مقتضيات الأمن بين الحلفاء: أميركا وتركيا وأوروبا و«إسرائيل»

ديسمبر 21, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– من المستغرب أن يرتضي بعض المحللين في العالم والمنطقة، إلا لاعتبارات التوظيف السياسي، النظر لقرار الرئيس الأميركي بسحب قواته من سورية، كتعبير عن مزاجية وانفعالية دونالد ترامب، فالمسألة ليست في مناقشة حدود الصلاحيات الرئاسية دستورياً، بل في قدرة الرئيس عملياً وواقعياً على التصرف منفرداً بقرارات بهذا الحجم، والنقاش الأميركي حول جدوى البقاء العسكري في سورية ليس وليد اليوم، ولا تحكمه حسابات مرتبطة بسورية وحدها، بل إن مبدأ الانسحاب من البر الآسيوي برمته ملف مطروح في التداول في دوائر صنع القرار الأميركي منذ أكثر من عشرة أعوام، بعد تقرير بايكر هاملتون عام 2006، وقرار الرئيس أوباما في عام 2010 الانسحاب من العراق عام 2011 وتحديد موعد الانسحاب من أفغانستان في 2013 الذي جرى تمديده مرتين لعام 2016 ثم لنهاية العام 2018، وفقاً لمقتضيات الحرب على سورية والرهانات الجديدة للفوز بها.

– الإجماع المطلق أميركياً على رفض الدخول في مواجهة عسكرية مع روسيا ومع إيران، يحصر البحث الأميركي في كيفية إدارة الفشل في الحروب، بين معادلات ضيقة، قطبها الأول التحول كيس ملاكمة يتلقى الضربات تباعاً دون قرار حرب، وقطبها الثاني الاحتماء وراء الجدار، وهذا يعني الانسحاب، وبناء جدار العقوبات وربط الانخراط بالتسويات التي تزيلها بشروط تلبي المصالح الأميركية، وهو جدار أشد متانة وفعالية من جدار الوجود العسكري، بنظر الكثيرين في واشنطن، ومنذ معركة حلب وسقوط الرهان على التعطيل التركي لمسار التوسع الجغرافي للجيش السوري مدعوماً من روسيا وإيران وقوى المقاومة، صار قرار الانسحاب الأميركي على الطاولة، والذي أخّره رهان آخر عنوانه ثنائية سعودية إسرائيلية مقتدرة عسكرياً في الضرب بقسوة في سورية واليمن، وقادرة على إطلاق مسار سياسي نوعي عنوانه إنهاء القضية الفلسطينية عبر ما سُمّي بصفقة القرن يحاصر إيران وقوى المقاومة. والهدف لهذه المعادلة المفترضة الذهاب لتسوية مع روسيا تنتهي بخروج إيران وقوى المقاومة من سورية كشرط لاستقرارها، وارتضاء الدخول الغربي على خط التسوية فيها.

– مع ظهور محدودية القدرة الإسرائيلية على حماية التدخلات العدوانية على سورية بعد القرارات الروسية بتوضيع شبكة صواريخ الـ»أس 300»، وتبلور القدرة السورية على التصدي للغارات الإسرائيلية، وظهور الفشل الذريع للسعودية في حرب اليمن وتحولها عبئاً عسكرياً وسياسياً، وسقوط الرهان على صدقية نجاح صفقة القرن في إيجاد الشريك الفلسطيني، وتبلور إرادة فلسطينية جامعة في رفضها، واتساع حركة المقاومة الفلسطينية الشعبية والعسكرية وفرضها معادلات جديدة، صار على أميركا أن تقرّر البقاء عسكرياً للوقوف وجهاً لوجه امام روسيا وإيران وسورية في حماية مشروع الانفصال الكردي. وهو مشروع يثير أزمة موازية مع تركيا الحليف الأطلسي لواشنطن، وذلك فقط لحماية الرغبة الإسرائيلية بفرض مقايضة الانسحاب الأميركي بالانسحاب الإيراني.

– بعد سنوات الحرب التي قادتها واشنطن على سورية، ترتب على الفشل ظهور تفاوت في مقتضيات الأمن بينها وبين حلفائها، سواء أوروبا التي باتت نظرتها لمفهوم الأمن تبدأ بقضية النازحين وتمر بخطر استهدافها عن قرب من تسلل الجماعات الإرهابية من الشرق الأوسط المشتعل، وتنتهي بالقلق من أي مواجهة مفتوحة مع إيران، سواء بمترتباتها العسكرية إذا حصلت، أو بمخاطرها على سوق الطاقة، ولم تتردد أوروبا بالتحدث علناً عن النظر للسياسات الأميركية كمصدر قلق، سواء بالانسحاب من التفاهم النووي مع إيران أو بطريقة إدارة الملف الفلسطيني، بينما ذهبت تركيا تبحث عن تموضع يعبر عن خصوصيتها، ووجدت في مسار أستانة ضالتها المنشودة، بالتعاون مع روسيا وإيران وما يسميه الأتراك بالخيار الثالث، وربط الدور التركي في سورية بسقف عنوانه مفهوم للأمن القومي يرى العلاقة الكردية الأميركية خطراً أول.

– خسرت واشنطن حليفيها الأوروبي والتركي وبقيت متمسكة بالحليفين السعودي والإسرائيلي، ووجدت أن عليها دفع فواتير باتت مكلفة مع استحقاقات داهمة، أبرزها الأمن الأميركي الذي يبدأ من أفغانستان، حيث التدخل الأميركي لم يكن تكتيكياً كما هو حال البقاء الأميركي في سورية، وحيث شرط التعاون الإيراني مع مقتضيات الأمن الأميركي في أفغانستان بتأمين انسحاب آمن تظلله معادلة سياسية ظهرت في الاجتماع الخماسي الروسي الصيني الباكستاني الإيراني الأفغاني قبل ثلاثة اسابيع، يرتبط عضوياً بالتخلي عن وهم الإصرار على انسحاب إيراني من سورية، فرأينا حزمة قرارات أميركية عنوانها التموضع على خطوط مفهوم جديد للأمن القومي لا يتبع السقوف السعودية والإسرائيلية، ويرى أن أمن «إسرائيل» والسعودية شيء ومفهوم السعودية و»إسرائيل» للأمن شيء آخر، وكانت التسوية اليمنية العلامة البارزة في هذه الحزمة، وما تحمله من تقبل لفكرة تحقيق مكاسب إيرانية في الخليج، وتبعتها خطوة الانسحاب من سورية بصورة موازية ومشابهة، والعنوان هو تسليم الأمن في البر الآسيوي لروسيا بما فيه ضمان أمن «إسرائيل» والسعودية بغير مفهوم «إسرائيل» والسعودية للأمن، وهو ما ستوضحه المراحل اللاحقة، ربما بالاستعداد للانسحاب من العراق، وبعدها إدارة أميركية أشد صعوبة للتفاوض على شروط التسويات ورفع العقوبات، والانتقال للقتال من داخل البنى السياسية والاقتصادية الناشئة عن التسويات.

– هي مرحلة جديدة في تبلور مفاهيم جديدة للأمن، لم يعد فيها الغرب غرباً، ولا الأطلسي أطلسياً، بل محاور منفصلة وفقاً لحسابات المصالح في كليهما، حيث لأوروبا كما لتركيا خصوصيات، وحيث إيران كضرورة أوروبية وتركية تتحول في أفغانستان ضرورة أميركية، رغم التحفظات السعودية والإسرائيلية، ولعله من المهم قراءة كلام الرئيس التركي عن تحويل تحدي العقوبات الأميركية على إيران إلى فرصة للتلاقي بينهما بمفاوضات تراهن تركيا على لعب دور الوسيط فيها..

Related Videos

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: