|
Syria: The (Russian Air) Cavalry Is Coming
In light of the catastrophic outcome of the "western" war on Libya the Russian government declared to oppose any further such "regime change" in the Middle East. But the U.S. continues to train, arm and finance insurgents against the Syrian Arab Republic and, under the disguise of fighting the Islamic State, prepares to take down the Syrian government. Eliminating the Syrian government would likely create a radical jihadist state in Damascus and lead to massacres and mass refugee movements.
But Russia means what it says and will now use its military capabilities to confront the U.S. plans:
Elijah J. Magnier
#Russia is providing #Syria with precision military and destructive equipment. #Russia will start soon operating n #Syria sky to hit rebels+
The participation of the #Russian Air Force in #Syria worries #Israel that won';t be able to have a free sky to hit Syrian troops.+
This is THE major change in #Russia approach and support to #Damascus regime, to prevent game change on the ground in #Syria +
The decision of #Russia comes mainly from regional support 2rebels, not satisfy w/ d north f #Syria (#Idlib) and aiming to #Hama & #Damascus
Russian air-support for Syria against the various forces attacking the state will allow for additional air attacks against those forces. The Syrian air force is today already flying more than 100 sorties per day against it enemies. The Russian forces will add to that but not necessarily in a decisive amount.
The main support for Syria by Russian air assets will come by keeping away those foreign air forces forces that threaten the Syrian government under disguise of "fighting terror". With Russian fighters in Syrian skies Israel will no longer be able to use its air force in support of Jabhat al-Nusra (and for its oil stealing endeavors in the Syrian Golan heights).
The U.S., Britain, France and others announced to enter Syrian skies to "fight the terror" of the Islamic State. Russia will use just the same claim to justify its presence and its air operations flying from Latakia. Simply by being there it will make sure that others will not be able to use their capabilities for more nefarious means. Additional intelligence from Russian air assets will also be helpful for Syrian ground operations.
The Russian air capabilities will be supplemented with air defense cover from Russian naval assets on the Syrian coast. Russia announced several air defense drills with live missile launches off the Syrian coast near Tartus. New land based air defense assets are said to be on their way. I would not be surprised to see, over time, some Chinese naval assets joining the Russian presence.
Secretary of State Kerry whined to Russia that its intervention in Syria might intervene with the U.S. intervention in Syria. Well, yes sir, that is the sole purpose:
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Friday coordination was needed between Russia's military and the Pentagon to avoid "unintended incidents" around Syria, where both countries have a military presence.
Lavrov said Russia would continue to supply weapons to Syrian President Bashar Assad to help the Syrian armed forces fight against ISIS militants.
He told a news conference Russia was conducting military exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, that it had been for some time, and that they were in line with international law.
The neoconned State Department childishly pressured Greece and Bulgaria to disallow Russian military air transport over their countries. But Russian planes can just as well fly via Iran and Iraq and both countries are very unlikely to ever block such flights. As Russian ground forces will not be involved in any fighting the supply needs can be kept limited.
Any attempt by Turkey, pressured by State Department lunatics, to block the Bosporus sea route between Russia and Syria would be in breach of the Montreux Convention and could be interpreted as hostile act against Russia on which Turkey depends for a large amount of its energy supplies. After losing control over the predominantly Kurdish south-eastern city Cizre Turkey also has to take care of its own civil war which Erdogan foolishly ignited to regain a parliamentarian majority. That internal war will hinder resupplies for the Islamic State through Turkey.
The U.S. plan to use the fight against the Islamic State as cover to remove the Syrian government is now in tatters. The months long U.S. supported "Southern Front" attack in south Syria failed to make any gains against the government. The Islamic State attack against Syrian government forces in Deir ez-Zor was repelled and further moves against Syria in the north will have to defy Russian air power.
Washington will now have to decide to risk war against Russia or to shelf the Syria regime change project.
Great post, b, great comments, everyone.
I think this move by Russia was totally foreseeable seeing as we did their very serious and meaningful actions following the Ghouta attacks. Now, with the usual suspects laying the groundwork for a similar plan, the Russians are again obliged to repeat the actions they took then – protecting the Syrian Government from those who seek to make it fall, and protecting the Syrian people from the bloody, chaotic consequences that would surely follow. To say he is “finally stepping up to the plate”, IMHO, ignores the important actions Russia has taken not just to defend major parts of Syria, but to keep the West from bombing, the results of which would be far worse than even what has come to be in Libya. And that’s an important point: there is far more at stake than just the chaos of Libya. In the case of Syria, there is the probability that sectarian genocide – run by the Takfiri forces funded by the Gulf States – would occur. Russia simply cannot allow that to take place.
Syria means a great deal to Russia, and on so many more levels than people in the West understand. Syria is far more to Russia than just a base in the Mediterranean. If policy makers in the West are basing their calculus for Russian action on that relatively small issue, they are making grave miscalculations. There are real human and historical links that bind Russia and Syria. There are long standing political links that go deep back into the Soviet Era. A look at http://vk.com (you need to sign up to do searches) shows much concern over the war in Syria. There are Russians, like their counterparts in the West, who feel concerned because of the Christian link – though in Russia’s case, this has an interesting historical link going back to the Czar claimed to be the defender of Christians in the Ottoman Empire. I imagine (and see evidence on VK) that Russians must also feel for the Syrian people because of the experience of the Second World War, presumably hearing the stories of their parents and grandparents of people facing conditions of total war. Finally, and this seems to make up the majority, there are those people there who clearly link all of Russia’s battles – from Syria to Novorossiya – as all the same contest being directed against them from the United States. After all, the Russians know better than anyone the US links with radical Islam, and having witness the continued enmity of the US even following the dismantling of the USSR, the Russians may truthfully say (compared to the lie of George W. Bush saying it) that “we fight them in the Middle East, or we fight them at home”.
The point is that there are links between Russia and Syria at all levels. And it is from these links that comes three things: the willingness of the Russian Government to take risks in the situation, the ability of the Russian Government to formulate and honest and clear policy, and finally and most importantly, the public support which allows for taking those risks without facing backlash at home. Compare the domestic political strength of the Russian position with the general weakness of the Western policy, a weakness which was exposed during the last crisis where the anti-war voice was heard loudly enough that it had to be a part of the calculations of policy makers. Surely this comes from the convoluted policy of the West which falls apart with simple attempts to even describe it, a policy which has no internal consistency that can be explained to the public at all. There are no political links between Syria and the US, evident in the fact that the US could find only exiles to populate its “revolutionary government”. The Christian link is certainly there… except that the US is on the wrong side of it. Then there is the idea of an alliance with Al Qaeda – an idea which could hardly be more repugnant to the American people (to be clearly separated from their leaders). So while the Russian Government can count on domestic support, the Western governments have to rely on media gimmicks which have definite shelf life and which are, at their core, untrue and so subject to controversy in the public discussion. The refugee story is an excellent example of this – the issue is real and its emotional appeal is undeniable, but using refugees as a case for more war? This is the same as trying to square the circle. It cannot be done. The same with goes for the promotion (and I do use the word advisedly) of ISIS as a threat ultimately works against the real US policy by opening the way for Russia to call of an anti-terrorist alliance.
That said, there is the “honest” version of US policy, given in Senator Graham’s statement posted by fairleft: “This is a chance for us to slap Russia hard, because what they are doing is making America less safe,” he said. “The Russians are just slapping President Obama and Secretary Kerry in the face. This is a complete insult to their efforts to try to find a solution to Syria. They’ve made Assad’s survivability more likely, which means the war in Syria never ends.”
That’s as honest as you can get from a policy maker, of course. Syria is, for the US, another chance to smack Russia. The war is about achieving US aims, and war will continue until the US achieves them. Peace for the sake of peace figures no where in the equation. Those who don’t follow the warlike policy are weaklings who are allowing themselves to be “slapped in the face”. So it is honest, but bring that to the American people as an excuse for another war in the Middle East and you’ll get laughed out of the room, forget about finding some kind of majority. As Grieved noted: “US foreign policy is obliged to maintain an ethical narrative with the US domestic population” and when there is absolutely zero behind the US narrative, then the majority of US citizens will not back it. The only question left, then, is wether the US elite is confident enough (read: anti-democratic enough and disconnected enough) to completely ignore public opinion.
This only covers Russia’s position, but the same goes for Iran. Though someone said the stakes for Iran in Syria are not so high, I disagree. I think the very clear threat to Hezbollah makes it a clear threat to Iran. Without Hezbollah, Iran will lose its main connection with Palestine and the struggle there, and this connection is a key to the Islamic Revolution’s raison d’être as any. But the stakes for Iran are evident in the huge amount they’ve invested in fighting ISIS and al Qaeda in both Iraq and Syria. The Iranian’s are no strangers to facing war by carried out by US puppets, and certainly they know very well that allowing a radical Takfiri state (allied with KSA and ultimately with the US) to form in the ashes of Iraq and Syria means war on Iran anyway so why not risk all to kill this viper in its nest?
==============
Interesting image from Syria: Poster, Syria, 2015 The inscription reads: “These people kneel only before God”
Posted by: guest77 | Sep 12 2015 4:45 utc | 48
Penny at 33 —
I share your apprehension about these rumors. They originated with the Israelis — Fishman of YNET is described as the dean of their military reporters and seen as credible. Who better then to float some disinformation? There remains no corroboration, but plenty of bluster from the right.
Here’s Lavrov from the Times of India’s reporting.
Lavrov said in Moscow on Friday that Russia would continue to supply Assad with weapons and called on other countries to help the Syrian government and its ground troops.
“You cannot defeat Islamic State with air strikes only,” Lavrov said. “It’s necessary to cooperate with ground troops and the Syrian army is the most efficient and powerful ground force to fight the IS…. I can only say once again that our servicemen and military experts are there to service Russian military hardware, to assist the Syrian army in using this hardware,” he said at a news conference in Moscow. “And we will continue to supply it to the Syrian government in order to ensure its proper combat readiness in its fight against terrorism.”
Meanwhile, the boilerplate keeps rolling off the DC press line. Our Nobel Laureate makes a sage observation.
Russia’s deepening military involvement in Syria will make it harder to dislodge Bashar al-Assad from power and find a political solution to the war raging there, President Barack Obama said.
Obama confirmed reports that Russia has sent additional personnel and equipment to aid Assad’s forces, a tactic that the president said was doomed to failure. [with at least as much evidence as for Russian involvement in MH17 – rm]
“The strategy they’re pursuing now, doubling down on Assad, I think is a big mistake,” Obama said Friday in remarks to military personnel at Fort Meade, Maryland.
With the “moderate jihadi” and Turkish intervention ploys failing to slow ISIL, ONL doesn’t need Moscow providing anymore complications. We’ll overlook the question if his record makes him the best party to proffer strategic advice.
And the real worries may lie elsewhere, with Jerusalem, says the Guardian. The aims attributed to the move by the Defense Minister look quite modest, unlike some of the hyperbole out of DC.
Speaking to reporters, Moshe Ya’alon, the Israeli defence minister, echoed claims by western sources that Moscow has in recent days dispatched military advisers and equipment with the main goal of setting up an airbase in the Syrian government-controlled area around Latakia.
“As far as we understand, at this stage we are talking about a limited force that includes advisers, a security team and preparations for operating planes and combat helicopters,” Ya’alon said in a briefing on Thursday….
Thursday, Lavrov defended Russian military assistance to Syria, saying Moscow wanted to avoid a repeat of the “Libyan scenario” in Syria and would therefore provide greater military assistance to the Syrian president if requested.
WIth sales of air defense systems earlier, it would seem the intent is prevent Syria from being subjected to “shock and awe” while it continues to fight.
If a line has been drawn, it’s in the steppes of the Donbas, not the sands around Latakia. Not that the junta didn’t jump right on the bandwagon. From the Times of India link above.
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Friday used the Russian military buildup in Syria to lash out at the country’s arch-enemy, blaming the influx of refugees into Europe on Moscow’s support for Assad.
“Today the so-called little green men are landing in Syria, instigating an increase in violence in the Middle East, and provoking a further increase in the number of refugees going to the EU,” Poroshenko said at an international conference in Kiev.
Why the hype? Our Nobel Laureate has been dying to get into Syria ever since his “line in the sand” provocation of chemical weapons was nixed by Russian diplomacy and domestic public opinion. This is another attempt to deepen American involvement.
Posted by: rufus magister | Sep 12 2015 16:18 utc | 71
|
