Trump’s Iran Sanctions Are an Obvious Prelude to War

Trump’s Iran Sanctions Are an Obvious Prelude to War

Maybe Trump really thinks sanctions will produce a "better" Iran deal. More likely, they're designed to justify conflict.

By Conn Hallinan

May 26, 2018 "Information Clearing House" -  The question is: Has the Trump administration already made a decision to go to war with Iran, similar to the determination of the Bush administration to invade Iraq in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks?

Predictions are dicey things, and few human institutions are more uncertain than war. But several developments have come together to suggest that the rationale for using sanctions to force a re-negotiation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is cover for an eventual military assault by the U.S., Israel, and Saudi Arabia aimed at regime change in Tehran.

Sanctions Seem Designed to Fail

As clueless as the Trump administration is on foreign policy, the people around the White House — in particular National Security Advisor John Bolton — know that sanctions rarely produce results, and unilateral ones almost always fail.

Sanctions aimed at Cuba, North Korea, Iraq, and Libya did not dislodge any of those regimes and, in the case of North Korea, spurred Pyongyang into producing nuclear weapons. Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi were eventually overthrown, but by American firepower, not sanctions (and with disastrous results).

The only case in which sanctions produced some results were those applied to Iran from 2010 to 2015. But that embargo was multi-lateral and included China, India, and one of Iran’s major customers, the European Union. When the U.S. unilaterally applied sanctions to Cuba, Iran, and Libya in 1996, the move was a conspicuous failure.

This time around, the White House has made no effort to involve other countries. The Trump plan is to use the power of the American economy to strong-arm nations into line. Back our sanctions, threatens the administration, or lose access to the U.S. market. And given that the world uses the dollar as its de-facto international currency, financial institutions may find themselves barred from using the Society for Worldwide Interbank Telecommunications (SWIFT), the American-controlled network that allows banks and finance centers to transfer money from country to county.

Those threats have not exactly panicked the rest of the world. China and India, which between them buy more than 1 million of the 2.1 million barrels of oil Iran produces each day, say they will ignore the sanctions. And according to Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign affairs minister, “The European Union is determined to act in accordance with its security interests and protect its economic investments.”

Adding up all the countries that will go along with the sanctions — including South Korea and Japan — will cut Tehran’s oil exports by 10 to 15 percent. That hurts, but it’s nothing like the 50 percent plus that Iran lost under the prior sanctions regime.

The War Party

In short, the sanctions won’t work, but were they really meant to?

It’s possible that the White House somehow thinks they will — delusion is a characteristic of the Oval Office these days — but other developments suggest the administration is already putting in place a plan that will lead from economic sanctions to bombing runs.

For starters, there’s the close coordination between the White House and Tel Aviv. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s April 30 speech shortly before Trump withdrew from the Iran agreement was tailored to give Washington a casus belli to dump the agreement. Virtually all of what Netanyahu “revealed” about the Iranian nuclear program was old news, already known by U.S., Israeli, and European intelligence services.

Four days before Netanyahu’s speech Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman met with his American counterparts and, according to Al Monitor, got a “green light” for any military action Tel Aviv might take against Iran.

The same day Lieberman was meeting with the Pentagon, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Saudi Arabia to end its campaign against Qatar because the Americans wanted the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to be united around a campaign against Iran.

Each of these moves seems calculated to set the stage for a direct confrontation with Iran involving some combination of the U.S., Israel, and the two most aggressive members of the GCC, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The latter two are currently waging a brutal war on the Iranian-supported Houthis in Yemen, racking up thousands of civilian casualties.

The Likely Fallout

It’s almost impossible to imagine what the consequences of such a war might be.

On paper, it looks like a cakewalk for the anti-Tehran axis. Iran has an antiquated air force, a bunch of fast speedboats, and tanks that date back to the 1960s. The military budgets of the U.S., Israel, and the GCC are more than 58 times those of Iran. But, as the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz once remarked, the only thing one can determine in war is who fires the first shot.

Military might does not translate into an automatic win. After almost 17 years of war, the U.S. is still bogged down in Afghanistan, and it basically left Iraq with its tail between its legs. Indeed, the last time the American military indisputably won a war was in Grenada.

As for the GCC, in spite of more than two years of relentless warfare in Yemen, the monarchs are no nearer victory than they were when the war started. And in Lebanon, the Iranian-allied Hezbollah fought Israel to a stalemate in 2006.

While Iran doesn’t have much in the way of military force, it has 80 million people with a strong streak of nationalism who would certainly unite against any attacker. It would be impossible to “win” a war against Iran without resorting to a ground invasion.

But none of Iran’s antagonists have the capacity to carry that out. The Saudis have a dismal military record, and the UAE’s troops are stalemated in their campaign to take Yemen’s capital, Saana, from the rag-tag Houthi militia. The Israelis don’t have the troops — and, in any case, would never put them in harm’s way so far from home — and the Americans are not about to send in the Marines.

Most likely this would be a war of aircraft and missiles to destroy Iran’s military and civilian infrastructure. There’s little that Tehran could do to stop such an assault. Any planes it put up would be toast, its anti-aircraft weapons are obsolete, and its navy wouldn’t last long.

But flattening Tehran’s military isn’t winning a war, and Iran has other ways to strike back. The Iranians, for instance, have shown considerable skill at asymmetric warfare in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and Iran does have missiles of its own.

The real damage, however, will be the fallout from the war. The price of oil is already on the rise, and hostilities in the middle of one of the world’s largest petroleum repositories will likely send it through the roof. While that will be good for the GCC, high oil prices will put a dent into the economies of the EU, China, India, and even the United States.

What a war will almost certainly do is re-ignite Iran’s push to build a nuclear weapon. If that happens, Saudi Arabia will follow, and the world will be faced with several new nuclear powers in one of the most volatile regions of the world.

Halting the Inevitable

Which doesn’t mean war is inevitable.

The Trump administration hawks broke the JCPOA because they hoped Iran would then withdraw as well, giving the anti-Iranian axis an excuse to launch a war. Iranians are divided on this issue, with some demanding that Tehran accelerate its uranium enrichment program, while others defend the agreement.

Europe can play a key role here by firmly supporting the JCPOA and resisting the American sanctions, even if it means taking a financial hit. Some European firms, however, have already announced they will withdraw their investments.

The U.S. Congress can also help stop a war, although it will require members — mostly Democrats — to put aside their anti-Iranian bias and make common cause with the “stay in the pact” Europeans. This is a popular issue. A CNN poll found that 63 percent of Americans opposed withdrawing from the agreement.

It will also mean that the Congress — again, mainly Democrats — will have to challenge the role that Israel is playing. That will not be easy, but maybe not as difficult as it has been in the past. Israel’s brutality against Palestinians over the past month has won no friends except in the White House and the evangelical circuit, and Netanyahu has made it clear that he prefers Republicans to Democrats.

Lastly, Congress should cut the arms pipeline to the GCC and stop aiding the Saudis in their war on Yemen

If war comes, Americans will find themselves in the middle of an unwinnable conflict that will destabilize the Middle East and the world’s economy, and pour more of this country’s resources into yet another quagmire.

Foreign Policy In Focus columnist Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com and middleempireseries.wordpress.com.

 This article was originally published by "Foreign Policy In Focus" -  

Sancțiunile lui Trump din Iran sunt un preludiu evident pentru război 

Poate că Trump crede cu adevărat că sancțiunile vor produce o înțelegere "mai bună" cu Iranul. Mai probabil, sunt concepute pentru a justifica conflictul. 

De Conn Hallinan

26 mai 2018 " Casa de informare a informațiilor " -  Întrebarea este: Administrația Trump a luat deja o decizie de a merge la război cu Iranul, similar cu decizia administrației Bush de a invada Irakul în urma atacurilor din 11 septembrie?

Predicțiile sunt lucruri dizertative și puține instituții umane sunt mai incerte decât războiul. Dar mai multe evoluții s-au reunit pentru a sugera că rațiunea utilizării sancțiunilor pentru a forța o renegociere a Planului comun de acțiune comun (JCPOA) acoperă un eventual atac militar al SUA, Israel și Arabia Saudită vizând schimbarea regimului în Teheran.

Sancțiunile se consideră proiectate

Deoarece guvernul Trump nu are cunostinta cu politica externa, oamenii din jurul Casei Albe, in special Consilierul pentru Securitate Nationala, John Bolton , stiu ca sanctiunile rareori produc rezultate, iar cele unilaterale aproape intotdeauna ezesc.

Sancțiunile destinate Cubei, Coreei de Nord, Irakului și Libiei nu au eliminat niciunul dintre aceste regimuri și, în cazul Coreei de Nord, au determinat Pyongyangul să producă arme nucleare. Irakul Saddam Hussein și Muammar Gaddafi din Libia au fost în cele din urmă răsturnate, dar prin puterea de foc americană, nu sancțiuni (și cu rezultate dezastruoase).

Singurul caz în care sancțiunile au produs unele rezultate au fost cele aplicate Iranului între 2010 și 2015. Dar acest embargo a fost multilateral și a inclus China, India și unul dintre principalii clienți ai Iranului, Uniunea Europeană. Atunci când SUA a aplicat unilateral sancțiuni Cubei, Iranului și Libiei în 1996, mișcarea a fost un eșec evidente .

De această dată, Casa Albă nu a depus eforturi pentru a implica alte țări. Planul Trump este acela de a folosi puterea economiei americane pentru a intra în linie cu națiunile puternice. Înapoi sancțiunile noastre, amenință administrația sau pierd accesul pe piața americană. Și având în vedere că lumea folosește dolarul ca monedă internațională de facto, instituțiile financiare se pot opri să utilizeze Societatea pentru Telecomunicații Interbancare Internaționale (SWIFT), rețeaua americană care permite băncilor și centrelor financiare să transfere bani din țară în județ.

Aceste amenințări nu au panicat exact restul lumii. China și India, care între ele cumpără mai mult de 1 milion din cele 2,1 milioane de barili de petrol pe care Iranul le produce în fiecare zi, spun că vor ignora sancțiunile. Potrivit lui Federica Mogherini , ministrul afacerilor externe al UE, "Uniunea Europeană este hotărâtă să acționeze în conformitate cu interesele sale de securitate și să își protejeze investițiile economice".

Adăugarea tuturor țărilor care vor merge împreună cu sancțiunile - inclusiv Coreea de Sud și Japonia - va reduce exporturilede petrol ale Teheranului cu 10-15%. Asta doare, dar nu este nimic ca 50% plus că Iranul a pierdut sub regimul de sancțiuni anterioare.

Partidul de război

Pe scurt, sancțiunile nu vor funcționa, dar ar fi vrut cu adevărat?

Este posibil ca Casa Albă să creadă cumva că o vor face - iluzia este o caracteristică a Biroului Oval în zilele noastre - dar alte evoluții sugerează că administrația deja pune în aplicare un plan care va duce de la sancțiuni economice până la alergări.

Pentru început, există o strânsă coordonare între Casa Albă și Tel Aviv. Discursul prim-ministrului israelian Benjamin Netanyahu din 30 aprilie, cu puțin timp înainte de retragerea Trumpului de la acordul din Iran, a fost adaptat pentru a oferi Washingtonului un casus belli pentru a renunța la acord. Practic, tot ceea ce Netanyahu "a dezvăluit" despre programul nuclear iranian a fost vești vechi , deja cunoscute de serviciile americane, israeliene și europene.

Cu patru zile înainte de discursul lui Netanyahu, ministrul israelian al apărării, Avigdor Lieberman, sa întâlnit cu omologii săi americani și, potrivit lui Al Monitor , a primit "o lumină verde" pentru orice acțiune militară pe care Tel Aviv ar putea să o ia împotriva Iranului.

În aceeași zi, Lieberman sa întâlnit cu Pentagonul, secretarul de stat al SUA, Mike Pompeo, a declarat Arabiei Saudite că va înceta campania împotriva Qatarului, deoarece americanii au dorit ca Consiliul de Cooperare al Golfului (GCC) să se unească în jurul unei campanii împotriva Iranului.

Fiecare dintre aceste mișcări pare să fie calculată pentru a crea o scenă pentru o confruntare directă cu Iranul care implică o combinație între SUA, Israel și cei doi membri cei mai agresivi ai CCG, Arabiei Saudite și Emiratelor Arabe Unite (Emiratele Arabe Unite). Cei din urmă doi conduc în prezent un război brutal împotriva Houthei susținută de Iran din Yemen, care a dus la mii de victime civile.

Fallout-ul probabil

Este aproape imposibil să-ți imaginezi care ar fi consecințele unui astfel de război.

Pe hârtie, se pare ca un cakewalk pentru axa anti-Teheran. Iranul are o forță aeriană veche , o grămadă de bărci de viteză rapide și tancuri care datează din anii 1960. Bugeturile militare ale Statelor Unite, ale Israelului și ale GCC sunt de peste 58 de ori cele ale Iranului. Dar, după cum a remarcat cândva teoreticianul militar prusac Carl von Clausewitz, singurul lucru pe care îl poate determina în război este cel care declanșează prima lovitură.

Forța militară nu se traduce într-o victorie automată. După aproape 17 ani de război, SUA este încă blocată în Afganistan și, practic, a părăsit Irakul cu coada între picioare. Într-adevăr, ultima dată când armata americană a câștigat incontestabil un război, a fost în Grenada.

În ceea ce privește CCG, în ciuda a mai mult de doi ani de război neobosit în Yemen, monarhii nu sunt o victorie mai apropiată decât atunci când a început războiul. Iar în Liban, Hezbollahul aliat iranian a luptat împotriva Israelului pentru un impas în 2006.

În timp ce Iranul nu are prea multă forță militară, are 80 de milioane de persoane cu o puternică forță de naționalism care se vor uni cu siguranță împotriva oricărui atacator. Ar fi imposibil să "câștigi" un război împotriva Iranului fără a recurge la o invazie la sol.

Dar niciunul dintre antagoniștii Iranului nu are capacitatea de a realiza acest lucru. Saudiții au un record militar militar, iar trupele EAU sunt înfrânte în campania lor de a lua capitala Yemenului, Saana, din militia Hagi-ului. Israelienii nu au trupele - și, în orice caz, nu i-ar fi pus niciodată în pericol atât de departe de acasă - și americanii nu sunt pe punctul de a trimite în marină.

Cel mai probabil ar fi un război al avioanelor și rachetelor pentru a distruge infrastructura militară și civilă a Iranului. Sunt puține lucruri pe care Teheran le-ar putea face pentru a opri un astfel de atac. Toate avioanele pe care le-ar pune la dispoziție ar fi pâine prăjită, armele anti-avion sunt depășite, iar marina nu ar dura mult timp.

Dar aplatizarea armatei Teheranului nu câștigă război, iar Iranul are alte modalități de a lovi înapoi. Iranii, de exemplu, au demonstrat o abilitate considerabilă în războiul asimetric în Irak, Siria și Yemen, iar Iranul are rachete proprii.

Daunele reale, totuși, vor fi consecințele războiului. Prețul petrolului este deja în creștere, iar ostilitățile din mijlocul unuia dintre cele mai mari depozite de petrol din lume îl vor trimite probabil prin acoperiș. În timp ce acest lucru va fi bun pentru CCG, prețurile ridicate la petrol vor afecta economiile UE, China, India și chiar Statele Unite.

Ceea ce va face aproape sigur un război este reaprinderea impulsului Iranului de a construi o armă nucleară. Dacă se întâmplă acest lucru, Arabia Saudită va urma și lumea se va confrunta cu câteva noi puteri nucleare într-una din cele mai volatile regiuni ale lumii.

Oprirea inevitabilului

Ceea ce nu înseamnă război este inevitabil.

Șoimii administrației Trump au rupt JCPOA pentru că speră că Iranul se va retrage și el, dând axei anti-iraniene o scuză pentru a lansa un război. Iranienii sunt împărțiți în această chestiune, cu unii îndemnați ca Teheranul să-și accelereze programul de îmbogățire a uraniului, în timp ce alții apără acordul.

Europa poate juca un rol-cheie aici sprijinind cu fermitate JCPOA și rezistând sancțiunilor americane, chiar dacă aceasta înseamnă a avea un impact financiar. Unele firme europene au anunțat deja că își vor retrage investițiile.

Congresul american poate, de asemenea, să ajute la oprirea unui război, deși va cere membrilor - în cea mai mare parte democraților - să pună deoparte părtinirea anti-iraniană și să facă o cauză comună cu europenii "rămân în pact". Aceasta este o problemă populară. Un sondaj CNN a constatat că 63% dintre americani s-au opus retragerii din acord.

Aceasta va însemna, de asemenea, că Congresul - din nou, în principal democrații - va trebui să conteste rolul pe care îl joacă Israelul. Acest lucru nu va fi ușor, dar poate nu atât de dificil ca în trecut. Frăția Israelului împotriva palestinienilor în ultima lună nu a câștigat prieteni decât în ​​Casa Albă și în circuitul evanghelic, iar Netanyahu a precizat că preferă republicanii față de democrați.

În cele din urmă, Congresul ar trebui să taie conducta de arme la GCC și să nu mai ajute pe saudiți în războiul lor asupra Yemenului

Dacă vine războiul, americanii se vor afla în mijlocul unui conflict unwinnable care va destabiliza Orientul Mijlociu și economia mondială și va turna mai multe resurse din această țară într-un alt mlaștină.

Politicianul din domeniul politicii externe Conn Hallinan poate fi citit la expeditionsfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com și middleempireseries.wordpress.com .

 Acest articol a fost inițial publicat de " Politica externă în centrul atenției " -  

The "Race To Raqqa" Is Quickly Intensifying

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44210.htm

The "Race To Raqqa" Is Quickly Intensifying

By Moon Of Alabama
February 14, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Moon Of Alabama" - This is a look at the larger picture of forces developing around Syria. Several foreign armies are aggregating at the Syrian borders with the intent to invade Syria and to occupy its eastern part. But before we dive into that, a short look at the curious situation developing in the north-west.
Near Azaz the U.S. ally Turkey is currently shelling (video) the U.S. ally YPG which is fighting the CIA supported FSA.

Map by AFP(?)

The Syrian-Kurdish YPG troops were heavily supported by the U.S. in their fight against the Islamic State in north-eastern Syria. Under U.S. tutelage they united with Arab anti-IS fighters under the label Syrian Democratic Forces.
In north-west Syria the SDF has used the recent success of the Syrian army against Jihadis in the area to take northern parts of the Azaz corridor which once connected Aleppo to Turkey. That corridor is held by a mixture of al-Qaeda Jihadist from Jabhat al-Nusra, "Turkmen" Islamists from various Turk speaking countries and local Islamist gangs supported by the CIA under the label Free Syrian Army. All three get money and weapons from Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
The Syrian army is moving north and south from the red strip in the map. The SDF is moving east from the Kurdish enclave around Afrin. During the last days the SDF, supported by the Russian airforce, captured the Minnagh airbase which was held by al-Qaeda aligned forces. The SDF then proceeded north to take Azaz, the last major town the Turkish supported Islamist are holding in the area.
Turkey today used 155mm artillery to fire from Turkey against SDF positions on Minnagh airbase and around Azaz. There will be Turkish special forces observers in Syria to direct the fire.
The NATO member Turkey is shelling the YPG, which is backed by Russia and the U.S., and the SDF which is backed by the U.S. for attacking the FSA and Islamists who are backed by the U.S., Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
A nice little clusterfuck the smart (not) girls and boys around Obama created.
But as described here two days ago in The Race To Raqqa Is On, a much bigger clusterfuck is currently in the making in and all around Syria.
The Russian and Syrian airforce will likely respond to the Turkish attack with an intensified bombing of positions held by Turkish proxy forces in Syria. Those forces just received new artillery ammunition and new TOW anti-tank missiles.
There is yet unconfirmed news that this situation will escalate very fast:

The Int'l Spectator @intlspectator
BREAKING: Turkish official says there will be a 'massive escalation' in Syria over next 24 hours.

The Turkish Foreign Minister said today that the fight against ISIS must include (Turkish) ground operations.
The Syrian government and its Iranian and Russian allies are determined to liberate the whole country from the foreign supported terrorists and the Islamic State. The want to keep the country united.
The aim of outside forces, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, the UAE, the U.S., Britain, France is to occupy east Syria to gain political concession from the Syrian government and its allies. They will demand the reconfiguration of the independent, secular Syrian state under President Assad into a dependent Sunni Islamist entity. Should that demand not be fulfilled they will form a new "Sunnistan" Islamist protectorate from the currently ISIS held carcasses of east Syria and west-Iraq.
Turkey today threatened further and wider attacks on Kurdish held areas in Syria. The Turkish 2nd Army is positioned to attack Syria from the north. It could come through the ISIS held corridor between Azaz in the west and Jarablus in the east and move south towards the Islamic State held Raqqa while other forces, see below, would reach Raqqa from the south and south east. Syria would be thus split into a government held western half and an ISIS and U.S. allies held eastern half.
Russian advisers have trained one Syrian brigade specifically for the purpose of holding off a Turkish invasion. But that brigade is probably not a big enough deterrence for the large Turkish forces and could soon be overwhelmed.
The Saudis today claimed again that Assad must be overthrown to defeat the Islamic State. That is of course nonsense but the Saudi family dictatorship has a personal grudge against Assad. The Syrian President once called the Saudis "only half men". (IMHO He was too generous.)
Twenty Saudi F-15 jets arrived today in Incirlik airbase in Turkey to, allegedly, join the U.S. coalition force against the Islamic State. The Saudis also promised to send ground forces if those would fight under some allied command "against ISIS". The United Arab Emirates promised to send special forces for the same purpose. Some Saudi ground forces have already been observed making their way through Jordan.
At least 1,600 British troops with heavy weapons and equipment are currently arriving in Jordan. The Brits claim that this is just for some normal training maneuver but we can expect the British government to paid off enough by the Gulf Arabs to take part in the fight. The British units would likely lead a Saudi/UAE/(maybe also Egyptian?) combined force from east Jordan up through the Syrian desert towards Raqqa and Deir Ezzor. These forces are currently explained as "trainers" who will enter Syria to instigate Syrian Arab tribes to fight ISIS. If there were enough forces in such tribes at all, these could be trained in Jordan. There is currently no Syrian or Russian force in the desert that could prevent such a move.
An additional brigade from the U.S. 101st Airborne is deploying to Iraq without much public announcement. Its task is an invasion of Syria from the south-east along the Euphrates to first capture Deir Ezzor and to then move on to Raqqa.
The Syrian army is on its way to ISIS held Raqqa to prevent any foreign force reaching there first. It will have to hurry up. The race to Raqqa is intensifying.
The Russians have alarmed several airborne brigades and air transport units of their Southern command to be ready for a fast intervention should such troops be needed in Syria. The Russians could airdrop an airborne brigade into the government held, ISIS besieged parts of Deir Ezzor (vid) to prevent that city from being attacked or taken over by Saudi and/or U.S. forces. Two additional Russian missile ships are on their way to the Syrian coast. They carry long distance Kalibr cruise missiles which can be used against other ships as well as against land targets.
Iran is ready to send as many men from its Revolutionary Guard and Quds brigades to Syria as are needed to sustain the governments fight. These folks salivate over the prospect of having some regular Saudi forces for breakfast.
There are active attempts to draw all NATO nations into the phony "fight against ISIS". When the war over Syria gets hotter NATO will likely try to create diversions elsewhere to keep Russia distracted from reacting properly in Syria. The U.S. will tell its Ukrainian puppet government to reengage in massive attacks on Russian supported Ukrainian rebels in east Ukraine.
The war against Syria, waged by the U.S., Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, was so far carried out by proxy forces and foreign mercenaries within Syria's borders. When the Syrian government was on the verge of losing the successful Russian intervention turned the war around. German intelligence no asserts (in German) that the Syrian government is winning the war against the foreign supported forces.
As the war by proxy against Syria has now failed, the anti-Syrian powers have decided to join the action on the ground with their own forces. The "fight against ISIS" (which the Syrians and Russian are fighting more than anybody else) is now the pretext to capture eastern Syria, to split the country in half and to destroy the Syrian government and state.
The "civil war" in Syria is now developing into an large international conflagration over the future of Syria and the whole Middle East.
Meanwhile the Islamic State, confused by this U.S. created clusterfuck in Iraq and Syria, decides to relocate its headquarters from Iraq and Syria to Libya, the other failed state and Charly Foxtrot the U.S. (F, UK) recently created. There it will find rich oil fields, lots of new weapons and no capable enemies.
- See more at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44210.htm#sthash.J4IhdeOH.dpuf

The "Race To Raqqa" Is Quickly Intensifying

By Moon Of Alabama
February 14, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Moon Of Alabama" - This is a look at the larger picture of forces developing around Syria. Several foreign armies are aggregating at the Syrian borders with the intent to invade Syria and to occupy its eastern part. But before we dive into that, a short look at the curious situation developing in the north-west.
Near Azaz the U.S. ally Turkey is currently shelling (video) the U.S. ally YPG which is fighting the CIA supported FSA.

Map by AFP(?)

The Syrian-Kurdish YPG troops were heavily supported by the U.S. in their fight against the Islamic State in north-eastern Syria. Under U.S. tutelage they united with Arab anti-IS fighters under the label Syrian Democratic Forces.
In north-west Syria the SDF has used the recent success of the Syrian army against Jihadis in the area to take northern parts of the Azaz corridor which once connected Aleppo to Turkey. That corridor is held by a mixture of al-Qaeda Jihadist from Jabhat al-Nusra, "Turkmen" Islamists from various Turk speaking countries and local Islamist gangs supported by the CIA under the label Free Syrian Army. All three get money and weapons from Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
The Syrian army is moving north and south from the red strip in the map. The SDF is moving east from the Kurdish enclave around Afrin. During the last days the SDF, supported by the Russian airforce, captured the Minnagh airbase which was held by al-Qaeda aligned forces. The SDF then proceeded north to take Azaz, the last major town the Turkish supported Islamist are holding in the area.
Turkey today used 155mm artillery to fire from Turkey against SDF positions on Minnagh airbase and around Azaz. There will be Turkish special forces observers in Syria to direct the fire.
The NATO member Turkey is shelling the YPG, which is backed by Russia and the U.S., and the SDF which is backed by the U.S. for attacking the FSA and Islamists who are backed by the U.S., Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
A nice little clusterfuck the smart (not) girls and boys around Obama created.
But as described here two days ago in The Race To Raqqa Is On, a much bigger clusterfuck is currently in the making in and all around Syria.
The Russian and Syrian airforce will likely respond to the Turkish attack with an intensified bombing of positions held by Turkish proxy forces in Syria. Those forces just received new artillery ammunition and new TOW anti-tank missiles.
There is yet unconfirmed news that this situation will escalate very fast:

The Int'l Spectator @intlspectator
BREAKING: Turkish official says there will be a 'massive escalation' in Syria over next 24 hours.

The Turkish Foreign Minister said today that the fight against ISIS must include (Turkish) ground operations.
The Syrian government and its Iranian and Russian allies are determined to liberate the whole country from the foreign supported terrorists and the Islamic State. The want to keep the country united.
The aim of outside forces, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar, the UAE, the U.S., Britain, France is to occupy east Syria to gain political concession from the Syrian government and its allies. They will demand the reconfiguration of the independent, secular Syrian state under President Assad into a dependent Sunni Islamist entity. Should that demand not be fulfilled they will form a new "Sunnistan" Islamist protectorate from the currently ISIS held carcasses of east Syria and west-Iraq.
Turkey today threatened further and wider attacks on Kurdish held areas in Syria. The Turkish 2nd Army is positioned to attack Syria from the north. It could come through the ISIS held corridor between Azaz in the west and Jarablus in the east and move south towards the Islamic State held Raqqa while other forces, see below, would reach Raqqa from the south and south east. Syria would be thus split into a government held western half and an ISIS and U.S. allies held eastern half.
Russian advisers have trained one Syrian brigade specifically for the purpose of holding off a Turkish invasion. But that brigade is probably not a big enough deterrence for the large Turkish forces and could soon be overwhelmed.
The Saudis today claimed again that Assad must be overthrown to defeat the Islamic State. That is of course nonsense but the Saudi family dictatorship has a personal grudge against Assad. The Syrian President once called the Saudis "only half men". (IMHO He was too generous.)
Twenty Saudi F-15 jets arrived today in Incirlik airbase in Turkey to, allegedly, join the U.S. coalition force against the Islamic State. The Saudis also promised to send ground forces if those would fight under some allied command "against ISIS". The United Arab Emirates promised to send special forces for the same purpose. Some Saudi ground forces have already been observed making their way through Jordan.
At least 1,600 British troops with heavy weapons and equipment are currently arriving in Jordan. The Brits claim that this is just for some normal training maneuver but we can expect the British government to paid off enough by the Gulf Arabs to take part in the fight. The British units would likely lead a Saudi/UAE/(maybe also Egyptian?) combined force from east Jordan up through the Syrian desert towards Raqqa and Deir Ezzor. These forces are currently explained as "trainers" who will enter Syria to instigate Syrian Arab tribes to fight ISIS. If there were enough forces in such tribes at all, these could be trained in Jordan. There is currently no Syrian or Russian force in the desert that could prevent such a move.
An additional brigade from the U.S. 101st Airborne is deploying to Iraq without much public announcement. Its task is an invasion of Syria from the south-east along the Euphrates to first capture Deir Ezzor and to then move on to Raqqa.
The Syrian army is on its way to ISIS held Raqqa to prevent any foreign force reaching there first. It will have to hurry up. The race to Raqqa is intensifying.
The Russians have alarmed several airborne brigades and air transport units of their Southern command to be ready for a fast intervention should such troops be needed in Syria. The Russians could airdrop an airborne brigade into the government held, ISIS besieged parts of Deir Ezzor (vid) to prevent that city from being attacked or taken over by Saudi and/or U.S. forces. Two additional Russian missile ships are on their way to the Syrian coast. They carry long distance Kalibr cruise missiles which can be used against other ships as well as against land targets.
Iran is ready to send as many men from its Revolutionary Guard and Quds brigades to Syria as are needed to sustain the governments fight. These folks salivate over the prospect of having some regular Saudi forces for breakfast.
There are active attempts to draw all NATO nations into the phony "fight against ISIS". When the war over Syria gets hotter NATO will likely try to create diversions elsewhere to keep Russia distracted from reacting properly in Syria. The U.S. will tell its Ukrainian puppet government to reengage in massive attacks on Russian supported Ukrainian rebels in east Ukraine.
The war against Syria, waged by the U.S., Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, was so far carried out by proxy forces and foreign mercenaries within Syria's borders. When the Syrian government was on the verge of losing the successful Russian intervention turned the war around. German intelligence no asserts (in German) that the Syrian government is winning the war against the foreign supported forces.
As the war by proxy against Syria has now failed, the anti-Syrian powers have decided to join the action on the ground with their own forces. The "fight against ISIS" (which the Syrians and Russian are fighting more than anybody else) is now the pretext to capture eastern Syria, to split the country in half and to destroy the Syrian government and state.
The "civil war" in Syria is now developing into an large international conflagration over the future of Syria and the whole Middle East.
Meanwhile the Islamic State, confused by this U.S. created clusterfuck in Iraq and Syria, decides to relocate its headquarters from Iraq and Syria to Libya, the other failed state and Charly Foxtrot the U.S. (F, UK) recently created. There it will find rich oil fields, lots of new weapons and no capable enemies.
- See more at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44210.htm#sthash.J4IhdeOH.dpuf

Syrie. Dégâts collatéraux

http://www.bvoltaire.fr/jeanmichelvernochet/syrie-degats-collateraux,238626?utm_source=La+Gazette+de+Boulevard+Voltaire&utm_campaign=b80567db10-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_71d6b02183-b80567db10-30626181&mc_cid=b80567db10&mc_eid=1b04a9fa11

Sanctions russes : l’autopunition européenneUkraine : Obama veut-il la guerre totale ?Al-Baghdadi, le calife à la Rolex

Alors qu’en Syrie se profile un hypothétique cessez-le-feu, jusqu’à présent chaque fois que des civils périssaient sous les bombes russes ou supposées russes, il s’agissait nécessairement de crimes de guerre. A contrario, que le Pentagone détruise avec ses drones un hôpital en Afghanistan ou en Somalie, ce ne sont que des dégâts collatéraux. Ce serait d’ailleurs ces mêmes bombes russes, et elles seules, qui à Alep jetteraient sur les routes de dizaines de milliers de malheureux. Difficile, à ce propos, de ne pas évoquer la mésaventure de M. Pujadas qui, lors du JT de France 2 du 4 février, pour illustrer la précision chirurgicale des bombardements américains, diffusa des images de frappes russes maquillées. Un énième trucage montrant que, trop souvent, nos grands médias, notamment du service public, sont devenus de grossiers organes de propagande, et rarement au service des meilleures causes.
Si l’on nous montre abondamment les flots de réfugiés fuyant Alep – qui, auparavant, semblaient s’accommoder cependant assez bien de la présence de l’État islamique -, on continuera d’ignorer qu’en contrepartie, des quartiers entiers accueillirent les forces gouvernementales en libératrices. Qu’à l’occasion les vaincus vomissaient dans les micros des journalistes leur haine des chiites. C’est dire que la dimension confessionnelle d’une soi-disant lutte pour la démocratie et les droits de l’homme est largement occultée, cela parce que non politiquement et médiatiquement correcte.

Lire aussi : Bataille d’Alep : le ton monte

En fait, pour ceux qui n’auraient pas encore compris, il ne s’agit pas en Syrie d’une guerre civile sous couvert d’une rébellion armée contre un régime ayant confisqué le pouvoir au seul profit de la minorité chiito-alaouite. Il n’est donc pas ici question d’une simple lutte idéologique (démocratie contre fascisme) comme voudraient nous le faire croire tous les savants exégètes qui se succèdent sur les plateaux des étranges lucarnes. Car sans doute vaudrait-il mieux parler d’affrontement interconfessionnel et idéologique, sachant que les rebelles sont essentiellement des sunnites en guerre (même s’ils ne le crient pas sur les toits) contre les chiites honnis.
C’est aussi une guerre idéologique parce qu’in fine, le sunnisme dont les « modérés » se réclament est celui des Frères musulmans, vecteur d’un islam politique dont la nature est d’abord idéologique, tout comme le wahhabisme de l’État islamique qui est un sunnisme schismatique, nihiliste et messianique, plus proche en son essence du bolchevisme que de la prédication coranique. Par exemple, la Tchéka, l’organe du terrorisme d’État mis en place par Lénine, avait à peu près un programme analogue à celui de l’État islamique : « La Commission extraordinaire… ne juge pas l’ennemi : elle le frappe. Nous exterminons la bourgeoisie comme classe… La première question que vous devez poser [à l’accusé], c’est à quelle classe il appartient, quelle est son origine, son éducation, son instruction et sa profession. Ce sont ces questions qui doivent décider de son sort. Voilà la signification et l’essence de Terreur rouge. » Remplacer le mot bourgeois par celui de mécréant (sunnite non wahhabite, alaouite, chrétien, druze, yézidi) et vous aurez un copier/coller du programme takfiriste.
Ajoutons à cela la dimension tricontinentale d’un conflit qui s’étend du Turkestan chinois au golfe de Guinée via Paris où se mêlent tous les peuples du Vieux Monde et de l’Afrique. Non seulement des foyers insurrectionnels sont actifs au Xinjiang et au Nigeéria, mais des brigades internationales sont à l’œuvre en Syrie, regroupant quelque cent nationalités. Tous mus, il va sans dire, par un violent amour de la démocratie. Or, si le monde s’embrase en conséquence d’une intervention annoncée de Riyad et d’Ankara à contre-courant des efforts de paix russo-américains, le vœu de M. Attali en faveur d’une gouvernance mondiale post-apocalyptique se verra peut-être enfin réalisé.

Jean-Michel Vernochet

Des brigades internationales sont à l’œuvre en Syrie, regroupant quelque cent nationalités.

Sanctions russes : l’autopunition européenneUkraine : Obama veut-il la guerre totale ?Al-Baghdadi, le calife à la Rolex

Alors qu’en Syrie se profile un hypothétique cessez-le-feu, jusqu’à présent chaque fois que des civils périssaient sous les bombes russes ou supposées russes, il s’agissait nécessairement de crimes de guerre. A contrario, que le Pentagone détruise avec ses drones un hôpital en Afghanistan ou en Somalie, ce ne sont que des dégâts collatéraux. Ce serait d’ailleurs ces mêmes bombes russes, et elles seules, qui à Alep jetteraient sur les routes de dizaines de milliers de malheureux. Difficile, à ce propos, de ne pas évoquer la mésaventure de M. Pujadas qui, lors du JT de France 2 du 4 février, pour illustrer la précision chirurgicale des bombardements américains, diffusa des images de frappes russes maquillées. Un énième trucage montrant que, trop souvent, nos grands médias, notamment du service public, sont devenus de grossiers organes de propagande, et rarement au service des meilleures causes.

Si l’on nous montre abondamment les flots de réfugiés fuyant Alep – qui, auparavant, semblaient s’accommoder cependant assez bien de la présence de l’État islamique -, on continuera d’ignorer qu’en contrepartie, des quartiers entiers accueillirent les forces gouvernementales en libératrices. Qu’à l’occasion les vaincus vomissaient dans les micros des journalistes leur haine des chiites. C’est dire que la dimension confessionnelle d’une soi-disant lutte pour la démocratie et les droits de l’homme est largement occultée, cela parce que non politiquement et médiatiquement correcte.

Lire aussi : Bataille d’Alep : le ton monte

En fait, pour ceux qui n’auraient pas encore compris, il ne s’agit pas en Syrie d’une guerre civile sous couvert d’une rébellion armée contre un régime ayant confisqué le pouvoir au seul profit de la minorité chiito-alaouite. Il n’est donc pas ici question d’une simple lutte idéologique (démocratie contre fascisme) comme voudraient nous le faire croire tous les savants exégètes qui se succèdent sur les plateaux des étranges lucarnes. Car sans doute vaudrait-il mieux parler d’affrontement interconfessionnel et idéologique, sachant que les rebelles sont essentiellement des sunnites en guerre (même s’ils ne le crient pas sur les toits) contre les chiites honnis.
C’est aussi une guerre idéologique parce qu’in fine, le sunnisme dont les « modérés » se réclament est celui des Frères musulmans, vecteur d’un islam politique dont la nature est d’abord idéologique, tout comme le wahhabisme de l’État islamique qui est un sunnisme schismatique, nihiliste et messianique, plus proche en son essence du bolchevisme que de la prédication coranique. Par exemple, la Tchéka, l’organe du terrorisme d’État mis en place par Lénine, avait à peu près un programme analogue à celui de l’État islamique : « La Commission extraordinaire… ne juge pas l’ennemi : elle le frappe. Nous exterminons la bourgeoisie comme classe… La première question que vous devez poser [à l’accusé], c’est à quelle classe il appartient, quelle est son origine, son éducation, son instruction et sa profession. Ce sont ces questions qui doivent décider de son sort. Voilà la signification et l’essence de Terreur rouge. » Remplacer le mot bourgeois par celui de mécréant (sunnite non wahhabite, alaouite, chrétien, druze, yézidi) et vous aurez un copier/coller du programme takfiriste.
Ajoutons à cela la dimension tricontinentale d’un conflit qui s’étend du Turkestan chinois au golfe de Guinée via Paris où se mêlent tous les peuples du Vieux Monde et de l’Afrique. Non seulement des foyers insurrectionnels sont actifs au Xinjiang et au Nigeéria, mais des brigades internationales sont à l’œuvre en Syrie, regroupant quelque cent nationalités. Tous mus, il va sans dire, par un violent amour de la démocratie. Or, si le monde s’embrase en conséquence d’une intervention annoncée de Riyad et d’Ankara à contre-courant des efforts de paix russo-américains, le vœu de M. Attali en faveur d’une gouvernance mondiale post-apocalyptique se verra peut-être enfin réalisé.

Jean-Michel Vernochet

King Bibi's dangerous legacy

Judging by Nir Hefetz, the former journalist who serves as the Netanyahu family spokesman, the State of Israel is in big trouble. On Dec. 25, Hefetz appeared on Channel 2's prime time evening news. He was invited to the show to respond to allegations that the attorney general had been pressured to shelve numerous investigation files concerning the Netanyahu family (such as the Bibitours affair, travel expenditures, the Bottlegate affair, an electrician's visit to the premier's residence on Yom Kippur and garden furniture misappropriated for the premier's private home).

Hefetz said, “If Netanyahu is shunted aside, the State of Israel will probably have to give up many strategic assets.” The way the prime minister has been handling himself indicates that Hefetz was expressing the views of his boss and of the Netanyahu household. In the premier's official residence on Jerusalem's Balfour Street and at the family villa in Caesarea, Netanyahu is considered one of a kind, indispensable. Not just a man; an asset. Up to now, the term “strategic asset” was reserved for what foreign sources call Israel’s “nuclear deterrence” at that secret installation in the town of Dimona. Any attempt to raise the curtain covering the reactor is deemed gravely harmful to a strategic asset. Ask Mordechai Vanunu.

Netanyahu’s inner circle wants to hammer home the message that the people of Israel should be thanking God for deigning to crown this special man as their ruler. Such an asset must be protected at all costs. He must be insulated against anything that might distract him from his sacred toil in the service of his people. How many prime ministers in democratic states are willing to take on not only their own job but also to assume responsibility for the Foreign Ministry as well as the ministries of Communications, Economy and Regional Development? How many world leaders manage to dedicate their energies, talents and time to political wheeling and dealing to maintain control of their party’s institutions?

If he could do so legally, Netanyahu would also appoint himself attorney general. By so doing, he would become immune to harassment by police investigators and state prosecutors. The attorney general is the only person who does not answer to the prime minister. He is empowered to order the indictment of the prime minister or the closing of a case bearing his name. The only institution authorized to overturn the attorney general's decisions is the Supreme Court.

Ironically, Netanyahu is to blame for the government losing its mandate to appoint an attorney general of its choice, someone like current Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein, whose term expires at the end of January 2016. To move his Cabinet secretary, Avichai Mandelblit, to the attorney general's office in the Justice Ministry, a special committee of jurists had to be convinced beyond doubt that Mandelblit was the most suitable candidate for the job. The panel was established in 1997 following revelations about the ugly scheme cooked up by Netanyahu and Shas leader Aryeh Deri, known as the “Bar-On-Hebron” affair. The two put together a deal: Shas, in the Knesset, would support an agreement handing security control over certain parts of Hebron to the Palestinians in return for the appointment of Jerusalem Likud politico Roni Bar-On as attorney general. As part of the deal, Bar-On was supposed to strike a plea bargain in Deri's criminal investigation. Eventually, the appointment of Bar-On was foiled. Deri was convicted of bribery and sentenced to two years in prison.

Then-State Prosecutor Edna Arbel determined that the deal was a criminal plot to take over the attorney general’s office in order to serve the interests of criminal elements. But Elyakim Rubinstein, who was appointed to the job instead of Bar-On, decided there was insufficient evidence to try Netanyahu. Rubinstein (who had also held the job of Cabinet secretary prior to being appointed attorney general) also rejected Arbel’s recommendation to indict Netanyahu in an affair concerning the Amadi moving company. Avner Amadi, the owner of the company, claimed that during a period of three years (when Netanyahu was first prime minister) he completed several private moving services for the Netanyahus, but was never paid for them. He sent a bill for 440,000 shekels ($110,000) to the prime minister's office and demanded to be paid. In September 2000, Arbel recommended to indict Benjamin and Sara Netanyahu for fraud and to indict Netanyahu alone for breach of confidence.

The conduct of Attorneys General Aharon Barak and Yitzhak Zamir, both independent jurists and law professors, are instructive in explaining why Netanyahu went to so much trouble to appoint someone who would be in his debt. Barak took a strict line at the time on the foreign bank account of the Rabin family affair. This approach brought about Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s 1977 resignation. Zamir’s refusal to cooperate with Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir in covering up the execution of the bus hijackers in 1984 brought about the resignation of Shin Bet Director Avraham Shalom. At the end of the day, Zamir had to pay for his much publicized confrontation with the prime minister and was removed from his position as attorney general.

In both cases, the influence of the attorneys general went beyond the realm of the criminal to the personal. Barak ruled that in dealing with suspected violations of the criminal code, a prime minister and a construction worker are one and the same. He would not have entertained the notion that if Rabin were shunted aside, Israel would have to give up many strategic assets. Zamir cleaned up the Shin Bet and brought about passage of the Shin Bet Act. On the Shin Bet's website, a passage reads that the organization set out to learn the lessons of the Rabin affair “thoroughly and in-depth, both in terms of values and of professional standards, resulting in the formulation of new codes of conduct and work procedures. Eventually, this led to the formulation of the Shin Bet agency’s values and the passage of the Shin Bet Act.”

The prime minister's candidate easily got past the selection panel, another significant step in a series of appointments of confidantes to key posts. Netanyahu is definitely an important asset to members of his party — but a dangerous liability to his society. He is ruining the prospects of an arrangement with the neighbors, isolating Israel and nurturing hatred and fear. And he is doing all this while practicing democracy in name only, displaying rare maneuvering skills with a narrow coalition of 61 Knesset members. Were he to display an iota of the same talent to promote the state’s strategic interests, Netanyahu would be a worthy candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/12/benjamin-sara-netanyahu-ga-barak-zamir-weinstein-mandelblit.html?utm_source=Al-Monitor+Newsletter+%5BEnglish%5D&utm_campaign=a315908cf7-December_30_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_28264b27a0-a315908cf7-102449213