Archive for the ‘Turkey’ Category

What is the real American game in Syria?

April 11, 2013
 

US Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey (R) and Turkish Chief of Staff General Necdet Ozel inspect a guard of honour in Ankara on September 17, 2012.

US Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey (R) and Turkish Chief of Staff General Necdet Ozel inspect a guard of honour in Ankara on September 17, 2012.
Tue Apr 9, 2013 9:33AM GMT
 
My bet is that all of these carefully played cards are a set up for two things, one of which is already in motion. Enough arms and ammo have been prestaged to back a final push to collapse Assad.
General Dempsey was in the news this week with his very sensible comments about the spiraling down Syrian debacle, whose vortex may catch those who don’t expect it, but might be most deserving.

Seasoned observers are quite used to seeing mixed messages in diplomacy, especially when they are used as a tactic of war. If you take a variety of positions, even if a disaster does happen you can whip out an archive statement where you said this or that, but no one would listen to you.

As the Prussian military theorist Karl von Claueswitz said, “War is the continuation of diplomacy by other means.” America seems to have chosen this war diplomacy policy for Syria while pretending not to be responsible.

This murky policy gets further complicated when you actually have competing factions within an administration, where verbal sniping and even verbal car bombs can be used to remind the opposing side that your views have to be taken into consideration.

Because General Dempsey is so highly respected across many divides in America his every word is absorbed and analyzed for both obvious and hinted meanings. If an administration wanted to send a message of a sincere potential policy shift, Dempsey would be the gold plated messenger.

But herein we must go into the historical closet where an event happened which is referred to in casual Intel talk circles as “’pulling a Colin Powell” on them, regarding how he was used to justify the Iraq attack for bogus WMD. The current military brass are well aware of this bear trap, and I would bet that Dempsey would not be played for a chump. He’s way too smart for that. Powell was not Bush’s top military adviser, like Dempsey is to Obama.

Let’s review some of who said what and when, and then try to figure out why. The Sunday April 7th Press TV report had the startling Dempsey headline quote, “Syria could become another Afghanistan”. He continued, “I have grave concerns that Syria could become an extended conflict”, that drags on for many years.

These were not off the cuff statements. They aired on a US funded Arabic satellite TV channel. Every word was pre-scripted. In the analysis business we often refer to this as ‘a card being played’. So task number two is to figure out what is it really for.

Digging back to a March 18th Dempsey talk to a Washington think tank, “I don’t think at this point I can see a military option that would create an understandable outcome…and until I do, it would be my advice to proceed cautiously.”

But we knew from our own sources and later published ones that a big covert arms push was already in process, flowing into various rebel staging areas as preparation for a sustained final push to topple Assad.

We know the CIA coordinated the operation with Jordan and Turkey logistically involved and the Saudis and Qatar paying the bills. This is what the Obama administration calls not providing lethal aid…proxies do it.

Dempsey is on record having favored arming the rebels for a quicker overthrow to avoid a drawn out contest which would risk leaving the Syria in ruins. Obama objected back then…but not now. They are doing it under the radar, sort of.

When Dempsey was asked if anything short of military intervention might be contemplated he gave a prepared, and what we know now to be a partially honest answer, that any such opportunities would be led by U.S. Allies. 

He played another prepared card, “We very much do believe that the answer to Syrian is through partners, because…they’ll understand the complexities better than we would.”

I could only wish to have been able to ask the general if he was so concerned about the 100 ring circus of rebel and insurgent groups operating against Assad, then would he like to address the Saudis providing bases, training, funding and arming of a new generation of Jihad fighters, even in northern Iraq. The Saudis are even running terror operations against Iraq now to keep them back on their heels.

Dempsey has to be aware of this. Any statements of America not arming these Syrian insurgent groups is duplicitous because we know that the Saudis are. They are supporting the Wahhabi extremists, who are taking heads as I write. Dempsey has to understand that when headhunters are loose on the land the Syrian Army and their militias are going to fight to the death.

We picked up a leak that an arms push would be coming soon by a ‘card’ Dempsey played during an airborne press interview. He said he would potentially consider arming the insurgents directly to end the fighting sooner and preserve the country’s institutions from being destroyed in an uncivil war of attrition.

Dempsey acknowledged the obvious even back then that the end game of increased armaments could contribute to a more violent new civil war among the various groups after the fall of Assad. The Balkans analogy has been widely used in the media to describe it. Lots of heads got chopped of there, too.

All of these card clues are what we call psyops… ‘preparing the minds’ of the public for things you have in the works to test their reaction. This as standard ‘game theory warfare’. Senator John ‘Cowboy’ McCain even has an acting roll, asking for bombing of Syria now which makes the covert arming of the rebels look like the non wild, cautious approach.

My bet is that all of these carefully played cards are a set up for two things, one of which is already in motion. Enough arms and ammo have been prestaged to back a final push to collapse Assad. The Syrian army counter strategy can clearly be seen to breakup up the rebel forward positions, find their hideouts and get their weapons caches. Press TV has photos of these operations all the time.

But if the Jihadis look like they could be the dominant force in an overthrow then the U.S. would come in with major arms supplies, but only for certain groups who would not only fight the Syrian army, but also the Wahhabis.

What kind of weapons are we talking about here? Start with longer range anti-armor and add ground to air missiles. I would bet that selected insurgents have already been trained in these weapons and are waiting for the right time to be deployed.

The Arab League seems to already know the general plan. You can look back now and see their violating their own charter to pre-empt the outcome by giving one faction of the rebels the Syrian seat. This was their assigned role in this slow motion train wreck.

And I predict some of them will regret setting this precedent.

But there is a wild card…the Russians, Chinese and the Iranians. The Russians man the Syrian air defenses, and they are not going to quietly sit by while the walls come tumbling down around them. If the U.S. felt that a ‘deteriorating situation’ justified intervention to ‘save the country’…then other parties would thereby have permission to do the same.

I don’t think they are going to just sit back and watch the carving up of their own ally and the threat that would pose to them not only in loss of face, but in future aggression. A failed intervention would be a huge blow to imperial militarism, as would the supplemental war bills that would be hitting the steps of Congress, requiring more red ink to fund.

Assad was correct when he stated, “If the unrest in Syria leads to the partitioning of the country, or if terrorists take control…the situation will spill over into neighboring countries and create a domino effect throughout the Middle East and beyond.”

Some of you can dismiss this as a self serving statement, but I will pose one scenario for you. If there is an intervention where American weapons are used against the Jihadis, how long, how many days do you think it would take to see them with advance weapons themselves, like the very good Russian anti-tank one, and then ground to air defense missiles popping up out of thin air. Are they already there, and being saved?

The West killed any negotiated settlement with the big March arms push. They seem to be going for a military settlement, but one where a mess could be laid on someone’s doorstep. But we all know the rebel groups will not negotiate because they feel they have the West behind them and time is on their side.

We have the blind leading the blind here in a situation which could trigger an even larger blood bath. So far the main beneficiary with virtually nothing to lose, once again, is Israel. The Israeli role seems now to keep banging the attack Iran war drum. John Kerry made a fool of himself on his Israeli visit with the silly ‘all options on the table’ substitute for a real policy. I can’t think of a more stupid way to convince other nations that they need a nuclear deterrent.

Dempsey was right about not seeing ‘an understandable outcome’. What the Western dummies and their proxies are doing is tossing a live hand grenade around in a circle. The outcome of that does not require a genius, or even an analyst…just someone who isn’t crazy.

JD/MA

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Israel Opens Conduit for Turkish Trade

April 11, 2013
 
Published Thursday, April 11, 2013
 
Israel has opened its seaports and land border crossings for Turkish trade to and from Jordan, Iraq, and the Gulf states. In lieu of the Syrian route, the Israeli option is a safer alternative.

The weekly economic supplement of the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth said that the Israeli decision came after a series of secret meetings that took place recently between Tel Aviv and its neighbors Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey.

These meetings, said the newspaper, prompted a change in Israeli policy, which enabled Ankara to use Israel’s sea and land ports.

According to the newspaper, the Israeli decision relates to goods that can only be transported by land, as opposed to by air. It added, “Ships carrying goods come from Turkish ports unload at the Haifa and Ashdod seaports. [Then the goods are] transported in Israeli trucks to the Sheikh Hussein land border crossing with Jordan.”

An Israeli satellite channel reported that the Sheikh Hussein land crossing with Jordan is now the site of active commerce. It confirmed that “the Israeli-Jordanian agreement was reached in cooperation with Amman and Baghdad.”

Israeli TV broadcast scenes of trucks carrying Turkish goods. The reporter talked to Turkish truck drivers who welcomed Israel’s policy change. One said, “Israel is good and we don’t have any problems with it. We deal with it positively.” Another driver confirmed “Israel’s kind treatment.”

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Syrian army stunned the world – With the beginning of April, the transition to foreign war

April 11, 2013

دام برس – متابعة – اياد الجاجة
لأنها بكل وضوح ستنسحب من الشرق الاوسط ولكن بشرط ان تبقى اسرائيل وأعراب الخليج قادرة على فرض الشروط في المنطقة ولأن سوريا تملك الاسلحة التدميرية البعيدة المدى وتشكل خطرا على اسرائيل ، فلابد من تدمير هذه الاسلحة ولأن تدمير الاسلحة لا يمكن بدون هجوم امريكي على تلك القواعد والمراكز ولأن تلك القواعد والمراكز مازالت مجهولة مع كل التقنيات المستخدمة .
فان الحرب على سوريا تعني حربا مجهولة الزمن والنتائج لذلك التخبط والتأرجح مستمر.
وفي النتيجة لا حل بدون حرب ولا يستطيع احد خوض تلك الحرب ولذلك اللعب بالأوراق بدء اوروبا تنسحب لتتدخل وأمريكا تنسحب لتتدخل في اطراق الصين .
وتركيا تخضع للتهديد الروسي ، والحرب على الحدود بدأت بالإنذار وستنتهي بالأرض حرب استنزاف و مع نهاية اذار تبدأ الحرب الخارجية.
عندما أعلن أوباما أنه سيزور إسرائيل وبعض دول المنطقة تحدثنا بأن وراء هذه الزيارة ما ورائها وأننا مطالبون بالحذر الشديد تجاهها وبعد ان تمت زيارته لابد من طرح عدة مسائل ليتبين حقيقة الزيارة وأهدافها الغير معلنة.
أوباما يرتب أوراق حلفاؤه استعداداً لحدث استراتيجي في المنطقة يتطلب جمع الحلفاء وهو حدث لا يبتعد عن عدوان خارجي على سورية.
– يرى أصدقاء سورية أن أوباما تجاوز الخطوط الحمراء، وأنه بحاجة إلى حدث يرد على زيارته واستعداداته للحرب.
– يظهر الحدث الكوري الذي أشعر أوباما أن أمريكا تحت خط النار.
– يتراجع أوباما بعد أن يدرك أنه وقع في مطب كبير.
– يسقط ميقاتي في وزارته النائية بالنفس.
– الملك الأردني يتخبط.
– تخلو الساحة من تأثيرات زيارة أوباما إلى المنطقة، ويتم تفريغ الزيارة من مضمونها.
وفي النتيجة الورقة الآن أصبحت بيد سورية وهي وحدها من يملك الآن حرية المبادرة
فقد حذرت سورية دول الجوار من إيواء معسكرات التدريب الإرهابي وحملتهم مسؤولية ذلك.
وهي تستعد لمعركة عالمية لمحاربة الإرهاب العالمي.
وهنا لابد من طرح عدة أسئلة هل هي الحرب خارج حدود الأزمة الداخلية؟ ومن يستطيع مواجهة سورية اليوم؟ خاصة بعد الإعلان الخطير في كوريا؟ هل هي بداية جديدة أم نهاية حتمية للحدث؟ وهل هو انقلاب ربيعي على الأرض السياسية؟
بعد فشل الاجتماع التآمري في الدوحة ورسالة مجموعة بريكس لكل من يزج نفسه في الحرب على سورية أعلن القيصر بوتين اعلان مناورات عسكرية وبشكل مفاجئ وهنا يطرح مراقبون مجموعة من الاسئلة ستشكل الاجابة عليها منهج للمرحلة المقبلة.
– لماذا أعلن بوتين عن مناورات عسكرية في البحر الأسود؟
– لماذا كان الإعلان في وقت حرج في الصباح الباكر؟
– لماذا كان الإعلان في مكان حرج وهو طائرة عودته من قمة بريكس؟
– لماذا لم يقم بإعلام الناتو بذلك وفق الاتفاقات المبرمة؟
– ما علاقة ذلك بالحدث السوري؟
كل تلك الأسئلة سيجيب عليها السيد نون قريبا علنا نستطيع أن نقدم للمتابعين دراسة تحليلية للواقع السوري ومدى تأثير الأزمة السورية على السياسة العالمية.
كل تلك الأسئلة سيجيب عليها السيد نون قريبا علنا نستطيع أن نقدم للمتابعين دراسة تحليلية للواقع السوري ومدى تأثير الأزمة السورية على السياسة العالمية.

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Israel Favors Qaeda over Assad: Regime will not Fall Soon

April 11, 2013
Local Editor
 
Israel ruled out on Tuesday that the Syrian regime would fall anytime soon, pointing out that Israel did not favor Bashar Al-Assad over Al-Qaeda, as the first formed an “axis of extreme evilness”.

Amos GiladSpeaking to Yedioth Ahronoth, Head of the Diplomatic-Security Bureau in the Zionist Defense Ministry, Amos Gilad, indicated that the “deterioration in Syria has allowed groups such as Al-Qaeda to establish itself in the country,” yet highlighted that he did not favor Assad because he is in an “axis of extreme evil.”

On the Zionist entity’s relation with Turkey, Gilad considered that “reconciliation agreement” between both parts was important due to “Iran’s nuclear situation”.

“Turkey has been enemies with Iran or Persia for 1,000 years; it (Turkey) cannot allow them to arm themselves with nuclear weapons. Turkey is not ready for Iran to go nuclear,” Gilad told the Zionist daily.

The “Israeli” official further emphasized that “even if Israel’s relations with Turkey did not return to their previous level, the importance of the reconciliation agreement was in that it stopped the deterioration of relations between the two countries.”

Source: Israeli Media
11-04-2013 – 15:16 Last updated 11-04-2013 – 15:16

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

RUSSIAN WARGAMES SEND STRONG MESSAGE AGAINST NATO INTERVENTION IN SYRIA

April 10, 2013

Posted on April 3, 2013 by

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

RT Op-Edge

A ship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet during large-scale military exercises Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered while flying back from the South African Republic to Moscow. (Screen shot of a video of Zvezda TV channel).(RIA Novosti)
A ship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet during large-scale military exercises Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered while flying back from the South African Republic to Moscow. (Screen shot of a video of Zvezda TV channel).

 

Is there a connection between events in Syria (maybe even US tension with North Korea) and Russia’s impromptu Black Sea war games that started on March 28, 2013?While on his way from Durban in South Africa, where the BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa —announced they were forming a new development bank to challenge the IMF and World Bank, Russia’s Vladimir Putin gave the go ahead for unscheduled war games in the Black Sea. By themselves the games mean little, but in a global context they mean a lot.

According to the Kremlin, the war games involved about 7,000 Russian servicemen, Russian Special Forces, Russian Marines, and airborne rapid deployment troops. All of Russia’s different services were involved and used the exercises to test their interoperability. Over thirty Russian warships based out of the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol in the Crimean Peninsula and the Russian port of Novorossiysk in Krasnodar Krai will be participating. The objective of the games are to show that Russia could mobilize for any event at a moments notice.

The war games surprised the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Who even complained the Russian war games started in the Black Sea without prior notice. In fact, NATO asked Russia to be more open about its moves and give NATO Headquarters in Brussels notice of its military movements in the future. Alexander Vershbow, the American Deputy Secretary General of NATO, even demanded “maximum transparency” from Russia. One may ask, why the rattled bones?

Russian response to war plans against the Syrians?

Is it mere coincidence that Russia is flexing its muscles after NATO revealed it was developing contingency plans for a Libya-style intervention in Syria on March 20? Two days later, Israel and Turkey ended their diplomatic row through a timely agreement that was supposedly brokered by US President Barack Obama in twenty minutes while he was visiting Israel. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that with Obama’s help a deal was made with Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Erdogan to end the diplomatic rift over the Israeli attack on the Mavi Marmara in 2010.

Days later, this event was followed by the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) — a phoney opposition organization constructed by the US, UK, France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey — being ceremoniously given Syria’s seat at the Arab League. In what appears to be an attempt at repeating the Libya scenario, the SNC is being recognized as the government of Syria. At the Arab League summit, the SNC’s leader Moaz Al-Khatib immediately called for NATO military intervention in coordination with Qatar’s call for regime change and military intervention in Damascus on March 26.

Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib.(AFP Photo / Karim Sahib)
Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib.(AFP Photo / Karim Sahib)

In a stage-managed move, the puppet SNC has asked the US, UK, France, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and NATO to enforce a no-fly zone with the aim of creating a SNC-controlled emirate or enclave in northern Syria. Al-Khatib has announced that he has talked to US Secretary of State John Kerry to use the NATO Patriot Missiles stationed in Turkey to create the no-fly zone over northern Syria. Effectively what he is talking about is the balkanization of Syria. Kerry seems to be on top of it. Victoria Nuland, the spokeswoman of the US Department of State, said the US is considering the request about imposing a no-fly zone. Even earlier, Kerry made a surprise visit to Baghdad and threatened the federal government in Iraq to fall into line with Washington’s regime change plans against Syria. He said he wanted the Iraqis to check Iranian passenger planes heading to Syria for weapons, but much more was said.

The American Empire’s satraps are all on the move. Qatar and Saudi Arabia no longer hide the fact that they are arming and funding the insurgents in Syria. In February, the UK and France lobbied the rest of the European Union to lift its Syrian arms embargo, so that they can openly arm the anti-government foreign fighters and militias that are trying to topple the Syrian government. Israel and Turkey have been forced to mend fences for the sake of the Empires war on the Syrians.

Obama realigns Israel and Turkey against Syria

The Israeli and Turkish rapprochement conveniently fits the aligning chessboard. Obama’s visit to Israel was about imperial politics to maintain the American Empire. As two hostile neighbours of Syria, Tel Aviv and Ankara will have deeper cooperation in the Empire’s objectives to topple the Syrian government. All of a sudden, the governments in both countries started complaining in line with one another about how the humanitarian situation in Syria was threatening them. In reality, Israel is not hosting any Syrian refugees (and oppresses Syrians under its occupation in the Golan) whereas Turkey has actually neglected many of its legal and financial obligations to the Syrian refugees it hosts on its territory and has tried to whitewash this by labeling them as foreign “guests.”

A child watches a woman washing a bassin at the Syrian refugee camp 5km from Diyarbakir, on the the way between Diyarbakir and Mardin, after snowfall, on January 9, 2013.(AFP Photo / Stringer)

A child watches a woman washing a bassin at the Syrian refugee camp 5km from Diyarbakir, on the the way between Diyarbakir and Mardin, after snowfall, on January 9, 2013.(AFP Photo / Stringer)
According to Agence France-Presse, the Israelis have even opened a military field hospital to help the insurgents topple the Syrian government. The military facility is located in an area named Fortification 105 in Syria’s Israeli-occupied Golan Heights (originally referred to as the Syrian Heights in Israel). It is essentially a support base for anti-government forces and only the tip of the iceberg in regards to Israeli involvement in Syria. Israel’s January strikes on Syria were the fruits of the cooperation between the Israelis and insurgent militias.

Sensing the suspicious eyes gazing at the Turkish government and perhaps getting unnerved by the Kremlin’s muscle flexing, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has rejected he claims that Tel Aviv and Ankara were closing ranks against Syria. Davutoglu must have been unaware of what was said in Israel about their rapprochement. Even though Netanyahu vowed never to apologize for the killing of Turkey’s citizens on the Mavi Marmara, Tel Aviv’s apology to Turkey was publicly justified by the Israeli government on the basis of addressing Syria through coordination with Turkey. Many of the suspicious eyes that turned to look at the Erdogan’s government over the deal with Israel are Turkish. Davutoglu actually lied for domestic consumption, knowing full well that the Turkish public would be outraged to know that Prime Minister Erdogan was really normalizing ties with Israel to topple the Syrian government.

The message(s) of the Russian war games

The American Empire is arranging the geopolitical chessboard with is satraps in its ongoing war on Syria. Perhaps it plans on using Israel to do a re-play of the Suez Crisis. In 1956, after Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, the UK and France drew a plan with Israel to annex the Suez Canal by getting Israel to attack Egypt and then claiming to intervene militarily as concerned parties who wanted to keep the Suez Canal safe and open for international maritime traffic. A new assault against Syria under the banners of the Israelis is possible and could be used as an excuse for a Turkish and NATO “humanitarian invasion” that could result in the creation of a northern humanitarian buffer zone (or a broader war).

A pattern can be depicted from all these events. At the start of 2013, Russia held major naval drills in the Eastern Mediterranean against a backdrop of tension between Moscow and the US-led NATO and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) coalition that has been destabilizing Syria. After the US and its anti-Syrian coalition threatened to intervene militarily and deployed Patriot missiles on Turkey’s southern border with Syria, a Russian naval flotilla was dispatched off the Syrian coast to send a strong message to Washington not to have any ideas of starting another war. In turn, the US and its allies tried to save face by spreading rumours that the Kremlin was preparing to evacuate Russian citizens from Syria, because the Syrian government was going to collapse and the situation was going to get critical.
A ship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet during large-scale military exercises Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered while flying back from the South African Republic to Moscow. (Screen shot of a video of Zvezda TV channel).(RIA Novosti)
A ship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet during large-scale military exercises Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered while flying back from the South African Republic to Moscow. (Screen shot of a video of Zvezda TV channel).(RIA Novosti)

Paralleling the Russian war games in the Black Sea, the Russian Air Force held long-range flights across Russia. This included flights by Russian nuclear strategic bombers. On the other end of Eurasia, China also conducted its own surprise naval war games in the South China Sea. While the US and its allies portrayed the Chinese moves as a threat to Vietnam over disputed territory in the South China Sea, the timing of the naval deployment could be linked to either Syria (or North Korea) and coordinated with Russia to warn the US to keep the international peace.

In a sign of the decline of the American Empire, just before the Russian war games in the Black Sea, all the increasingly assertive BRICS leaders warned the US against any adventurism in Syria and other countries. The Russian and Chinese muscle flexing are messages that tell Washington that Beijing and Moscow are serious and mean what they say. At the same time, these events can be read as signs that the world-system is coming under new management.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Turkey awaits ‘total Syrian meltdown’ to lure Lebanon into Turkey-Israel ‘gas-cooperation-network’

April 8, 2013

FLC

“…The bottom line is that Ankara can cause serious headaches for the Greek Cypriot administration at a time when it least needs it, given Turkey’s growing importance as an energy hub that major companies can ill-afford to overlook. The hope among diplomats is that the Greek Cypriot administration will eventually wake up to the benefits of a Cyprus settlement, and cooperation with Turkey in the energy field.On the other hand, a Turkish-Israeli rapprochement does not mean that the two countries will have an easy ride in realizing their joint pipeline project, if this is decided on. Haaretz recently quoted industry sources saying that such a pipeline would have to pass through the economic zones of Lebanon and Syria before reaching Turkey, which is bound to be problematic.
The future of Syria, however, is in the balance today. Meanwhile, Lebanon is also searching for the vast offshore reserve it believes exists in its own economic interest zone in the Eastern Mediterranean. If proven, these reserves will have to be exploited with international cooperation.
 

A Turkey, that has consummated its ties with Israel by means of a strategic pipeline will have every reason to use its influence over Lebanon in order to convince it to join the network of cooperation in the Levant Basin for the sake of its own economic future and regional stability. 

This may appear a long shot from today’s perspective, but it is clear that the region is on the threshold of major developments today. It is seems therefore to be in the best interest of regional countries to play their cards right as the new “Great Game” unfolds at a time when it is clear that energy can be a cause for conflict as much as it can be a medium that catalyzes peace and cooperation.
Of course there is also an Iranian, and Russian angle to the Great Game in the Levant Basin, not to mention developments in Northern Iraq, which some may feel have been overlooked here.…”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

President Assad to Turkish Turkish Ulusal TV: Assad: Erdogan has a sectarian «brothers» mind… The division of Syria will move to Neighbourhood

April 7, 2013

PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD’S FULL INTERVIEW WITH TURKISH TV


Posted on April 5, 2013 by

Part I

Part II
Interview given by President Bashar al-Assad to Turkish Ulusal TV

Highlight: Erdogan is lying!
HandsoffSyria
Published on 5 Apr 2013
Broadcasted on 5-April-2013
ALSO SEE:
PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD’S SPEECHES AND INTERVIEWS

لقاء الرئيس الأسد مع قناة أولوصال وصحيفة أيدنليك التركيتين

الأسد: عقل أردوغان «إخواني»… وتقسيم سوريا سينتقل للجوار

 
 
 
 


شن الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد هجوماً على رئيس الحكومة التركية رجب طيب أردوغان، واتهمه بأنه يحمل عقل جماعة الإخوان المسلمين وأنه رأى في الأحداث التي تحصل في العالم العربي فرصة له لإطالة عمره السياسي.

وفي مقابلة مع قناة «اولوصال» وصحيفة «ايدنليك» التركيتين بثت أمس، قال الأسد «نحن محاطون بمجموعة من الدول التي تقوم بمساعدة الإرهابيين في الدخول إلى سوريا»، مشيرا إلى أنه «في لبنان هناك أطراف مختلفة تساعد أو تقف ضد إدخال الإرهابيين إلى سوريا، لكن تركيا تقوم رسمياً باحتضان الإرهابيين وإدخالهم إلى سوريا».

وعن تقييمه لنشاطات دول «البريكس» فيما هناك دول عربية وغربية تدعم المسلحين، قال الأسد إن «الصراع في سوريا لم يكن بالأساس صراعاً محلياً.

هناك حراك داخلي في سوريا، ولكن الموضوع برمّته خارجي. هو صراع خارجي مرتبط بالخريطة الإقليمية، وإعادة رسم خريطة المنطقة، وفي الوقت ذاته مرتبط بالصراع بين القوى الكبرى. إن تشكيل مجموعة البريكس يدل على أن الولايات المتحدة لن تكون بعد الآن القطب الوحيد في العالم. مجموعة البريكس لا تدعم الرئيس بشار ولا سوريا، هي تدعم الاستقرار في المنطقة، والكل يعرف أنه إذا حصل اضطراب في سوريا وصل إلى مرحلة التقسيم أو سيطرة القوى الإرهابية في سوريا، أو كلاهما، فلا بد أن ينتقل هذا الوضع إلى الدول المجاورة أولا وبعدها، بتأثير الدومينو، إلى دول بعيدة عن الشرق الأوسط. من هذا المنطلق وقفت دول البريكس مع الحل السياسي في سوريا في مواجهة القوى الغربية».

وعن دعم أميركا وتركيا وفرنسا ودول الخليج لطرف في سوريا وما إذا كان يفكر بترك منصبه بسبب مطالبة أكثر من 100 دولة بهذا الأمر، قال الأسد «هناك عدد كبير من الدول الغربية والإقليمية تقف ضد الرئيس وفي الوقت ذاته يقف شعبه ضده، فكيف يبقى؟ وكيف تصمد سوريا لمدة سنتين؟! أنا رئيس منتخب من قبل الشعب السوري، لذلك فإن النتيجة هي أن مجيء رئيس أو ذهاب رئيس هو قرار يتخذ داخليا».

وتابع «هل هذه الدول حريصة على دماء الشعب السوري؟ إن الولايات المتحدة تقف مع جرائم إسرائيل وارتكبت المجازر في أفغانستان والعراق. فرنسا وبريطانيا ترتكبان، بتغطية أميركية، المجازر في ليبيا. الحكومة التركية الحالية منغمسة بالدماء السورية. هل هذه الدول حريصة على الدم السوري؟ هذا القرار هو قرار شعبي سوري ولا علاقة لأي دولة به».

وقال الأسد «نحن محاطون بمجموعة من الدول التي تقوم بمساعدة الإرهابيين في الدخول إلى سوريا. ليس بالضرورة أن تكون مقصودة، فمثلا العراق ضد تسريب الإرهابيين ولكنّ لديه ظروفاً معينة لا تسمح بضبط الحدود. وفي لبنان هناك أطراف مختلفة تساعد أو تقف ضد إدخال الإرهابيين إلى سوريا. تركيا تقوم رسمياً باحتضان الإرهابيين وإدخالهم إلى سوريا. هناك تسريب يأتينا من الأردن، ومن غير الواضح تماماً إذا كان مقصوداً أم لا، وما دام هناك تسريب للإرهابيين فسيكون هناك معارك مع أولئك الإرهابيين. هي حقيقة حرب بكل ما تعني الكلمة. إن الإرهابيين يدخلون بالآلاف، وربما بعشرات الآلاف، فمن الطبيعي أن تسمع أصوات المعارك في عدة أماكن في سوريا».

وعن تغيّر العلاقة بينه وبين أردوغان، قال الأسد «يبدو أن أردوغان رأى في الأحداث التي تحصل في العالم العربي فرصة له لإطالة عمره السياسي. هذا الرجل عقله عقل إخوان مسلمين. وتجربتنا مع الإخوان في سوريا منذ أكثر من 30 عاما هم أنهم مجموعة انتهازية تستخدم الدين من أجل مصالح شخصية. هو رأى بأن دولا أخرى قامت بها ثورات أو انقلابات أو تدخلات أجنبية أتت بمجموعات من الإخوان إلى الحكم، فرأى في هذا الأمر فرصة كبيرة لاستمراره في الحكم لسنوات طويلة، فانقلب على سوريا لأن في ذلك فرصة شخصية للاستمرار في الحكم. ومنذ البداية، وقبل الأزمة، كان اهتمام أردوغان منصبّا على الإخوان أكثر من اهتمامه في موضوع العلاقات السورية ـ التركية واهتمامه بتركيا نفسها. هكذا يفكر هذا الشخص. فعندما أتت هذه الظروف قرر أن يقف مع مصالحه قبل مصالح سوريا وتركيا. حاول التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية السورية، ومن ثم بدأوا بدعم الإرهابيين علناً وتورطوا في الدماء السورية، ومن الطبيعي أن تنقطع العلاقة بيننا وبينهم».

وحول إعلان أردوغان انه قدم اقتراحات له من أجل الإصلاح، وعدم أخذه هذه الاقتراحات بالاعتبار، قال الأسد «للأسف، لم يقل أردوغان كلمة صدق واحدة منذ بداية الأزمة. لقد قدم مقترحات عامة تتحدث عن أن الشعب السوري يجب أن يقرر من يكون رئيسه وأي نظام يريده، وهذا ما قلته. والآن لدينا حوار في سوريا، نحضّر له، وستجتمع فيه كل القوى السياسية وتقرر ما تريده، وليس ما يريده أردوغان. هناك سؤال، وهو إذا كان أردوغان قدم مقترحات لكي تحل المشكلة في سوريا فما علاقة هذه المقترحات بدعم المسلحين؟ أردوغان اليوم يقوم بجلب المسلحين، بتمويل قطري، ويؤمن لهم السلاح عبر الأراضي التركية والخدمات الطبية ويرسلهم إلى سوريا. هل هذا المقترح كان موجوداً بين المقترحات التي قدمها لي، أم أن هذه المقترحات كانت مجرد غطاء يستخدمه لكي يصل إلى هدفه. هو يعرف أننا كنا مع الحوار، ومنذ اليوم الأول أعلنّا موافقتنا على الحوار مع كل القوى السورية، وعندما فشلت المرحلة الأولى، التي كانوا يسمونها المرحلة السلمية، انتقلوا إلى دعم المسلحين. أردوغان يكذب ويستخدم هذه المقترحات مجرد قناع. نحن نقبل النصيحة من أي جهة ولكن لا نقبل على الإطلاق التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية السورية. وعلى ما يبدو أن أردوغان فهم موقفنا خطأ، وفهم بأن العلاقة الأخوية بيننا وبين تركيا تسمح له بالتدخل في الشؤون الداخلية السورية بهدف العمل على إسقاط الدولة، ولكن الموضوع كان واضحاً بالنسبة لي منذ الأيام الأولى».

ونفى الأسد أن تكون السلطات السورية تفكر بالرد بالمثل على دعم الأتراك للمسلحين، موضحاً «هذا ما يريده أردوغان، لأنه يريد وقوع صدام على المستوى الشعبي بين البلدين حتى يحصل على الدعم الشعبي لسياساته ليستعيد بعضاً من شعبيته التي خسرها». وأضاف «حتى اليوم لم نلق القبض على أي عنصر استخبارات تركي، لكن عدم وجود استخبارات على أراضينا لا يعني أنها غير متورطة».

وقال الأسد «نحن منذ أن بدأ التحرك داخل تركيا منذ عدة سنوات باتجاه حل المشكلة الكردية كان موقفنا الواضح والصريح هو دعم أي حل بين الأكراد والأتراك، لأننا لا نريد أن نرى المزيد من الدماء في بلدكم والتي ستنعكس سلباً على المنطقة. نحن ندعم أي حل صادق في هذا الاتجاه، لأن الأكراد جزء طبيعي من نسيج المنطقة».
(«السفير)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Ignoring western propaganda , who exactly is Bashar Al Assad ?

April 4, 2013

Syria: Democracy vs. Foreign Invasion. Who is Bashar Al Assad?

A Syrian’s Perspective: Bashar al-Assad’s Democratic Movement

by Arabi Souri

 

ASSADBashar al-Assad has recently been demonized by the mainstream and so-called alternative media who claim that he is a brutal dictator(?). Actually Bashar is a reformer who has done much to further the causes of democracy and freedom.

It is the opposition and their foreign supporters who represent the most repressive elements of the former ruling party in Syria. To fully understand this its is helpful to look at the historical context of the current crisis. The so-called “spontaneous popular uprising” started in Daraa on March 15th, 2011. The court house, police stations, governor’s house, and other public buildings were looted and torched by the “peaceful protestors” in the first week of the crisis. The people in Homs then began to protest in solidarity with Daraa, but this was uncharacteristic of peaceful Homs and many Syrians knew that it was a fake revolution.

About 110 unarmed police officers were murdered in Daraa and Homs, sparking anger against the “revolutionaries.” There was an incident in the city Baniyas where an Alawite truck driver was attacked by an armed mob, skinned, and paraded through the city. This disgusted almost all Syrians and since then not a single major city actually rebelled against the government. The foreign backed “revolutionaries” would attack a neighborhood, police station, or army base, from across the borders of Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, and Iraq. Then they would claim that the city was in rebellion.

But the Syrians, seeing the same lies in all the western and Arab news stations, and the exiled rotten officials adopting the ‘revolution’, mostly took an anti-revolution stance. That is why whenever the rebels would infest a town or city you would immediately hear of a massacre to punish the residents for not supporting them. Of course the mainstream media would claim that it was Assad forces punishing the town that dared to oppose him!

Assad took advantage of the revolution to introduce his packages of reforms, putting aside those in the old guards who opposed them. Many of the old guard then joined the opposition abroad.

The opposition demanded the removal of article 8 from the Syrian constitution making the Baath Party head of the government. Instead of just deleting it Bashar Assad had the constitution re-written buy a specialized committee of Syrian experts from all parties in Syria and with input from all Syrians.

A referendum was held and the new constitution was approved with almost 90% of a voter turnout of 60%. Assad then enacted a Media Law that would allow more freedom of expression and the establishment of new independent media outlets. Assad eased requirements on the formation of political parties, excluding sectarian based parties. We now have at least nine new political parties.

Municipal elections were held in December 2011. Many of those who won seats were assassinated or threatened throughout the country by the same revolutionaries who claimed to want democracy. Parliamentary elections were held in May 2012 with no eligibility restraints on the candidates. Many new members of parliament have also been assassinated by the FSA including the wife and three daughters of parliament elect trustee Abdulla Mishleb in the infamous Houla massacre.

 
 
Historical Context: Syria in the 1980s
 
MASSACRE

Recent events can be better understood in the context of Syrian history. Bashar al-Assad is the son of late president Hafez al-Assad. Hafez was described by western mainstream media as a tyrant and oppressor but he was not nearly as bad as any other leader in his time like Thatcher, Reagan, or any of the region’s rulers including Turkey’s military rule.

The current anti-Assad opposition often refer to the 1982 Hama ‘massacre’. They claim that Hafez besieged the city and then bombed it killing up to 40,000 civilians. I lived in Damascus at that time and you must understand the conditions in the country at the time to know what really happened.

1) The Muslim Brotherhood was engaged in a war of terror at that time, nothing less than what the Free Syrian Army (FSA) is doing now. The Muslim Brotherhood’s forces were called the ‘Fighting Vanguard’ (Arabic “Al Taleea Al Muqatleh”). Many of the present leaders of the FSA are the same men who led the Fighting Vanguard in the 80s; and they were as savage as their sons now. One of the Fighting Vanguard’s bombings included the Azbakiyeh Bombing in Damascus which took the lives of over 175 civilians and injured hundreds more, and there were many other terror attacks.

2) The entire Hama episode was led by Hafez al-Assad’s younger brother (Bashar al-Assad’s uncle) Rifaat Assad. Rifaat was heading the Saraya Difaa (later to become the Republican Guard). At that time the Syrian minister of defense was Mustapha Tlass, and the Syrian minister of foreign affairs was Abdul Halim Khaddam. All three of them: Riffaat al-Assad, Mustapha, and Abdul Khaddam are leading and financing the political opposition against Bashar from abroad right now.

In the current conflict Mustapha’s son Manaf Tlass was sent to negotiate a settlement with his cousins who were rebelling in Rastan. But instead of negotiating he gave them weapons from the Republican Guards caches and leaked secrets causing the deaths of many Republican Guard soldiers at the hands of the FSA.

Thirty years after the fighting in Hama a report by US intelligence was declassified revealing that the death toll didn’t even reach 2,000. That number included 400 Muslim Brotherhood Fighting Vanguard militants; many Syrian Army soldiers and officers; Baath Party and other state officials; and a number of civilians who were caught in the fire.

3) At the same time the Syrian Army was fighting the Israeli, US and French Armies in Lebanon.

4) Syria was under harder sanctions than it is now. Syria has been under increasingly severe western sanctions since 1956, 15 years before Hafez Assad took power.

 
assad5


Bashar al-Assad’s Damascus Spring: Syria in the 2000s

Late Hafez Assad followed a more complex policy regarding foes and foreign agents in his government than Bashar does. Hafez would keep his foes in their posts but under his watchful eyes. When Bashar was selected by the Syrian Parliament to succeed his father in 2000 he removed all of the treasonous foes and foreign agents that Hafez had maintained in office.

Bashar’s first reform was to ease some political restrictions, allowing politicians to move more freely. In June 2000 the Damascus Spring was started. It lasted until Autumn 2001 by which time most of the treasonous opposition’s foreign funding, and relations with the US Department of State and corporate think tanks had been exposed. The corrupt officials and their families were expelled from Syria and settled in foreign countries. They used their massive accumulations of wealth to mount political opposition to Bashar from abroad.

 
assad03


In 2003 the US was occupying Iraq. US Secretary of State Collin Powell visited Bashar and handed him a list of demands including: 1. Cutting all ties with the five main Palestinian factions in Syria, 2. Severing Syria’s relations with Iran in exchange for a promise of better relations with some Arab states.
3. Signing a peace treaty with Israel similar to one Syria had already refused.
4. Removing books from schools with any enmity towards Israel. 5. Allowing western banks and companies unhindered access to Syrian markets and resources along with other neo-liberal reforms.

Bashar refused these demands in the face of the nearly 200,000 coalition troops across the Syrian border in Iraq. Instead Bashar sought to hinder the occupation of Iraq and demanded that the occupying forces withdraw. Because of the proximity of Damascus to the western boarder with Lebanon Syria has the strategic need to secure this border. None the less in 2000 Bashar started withdrawing Syrian troops from Lebanon where they had battled Israeli forces. The troops were reduced from 35,000 in the year 2000 to 14,000 in early 2004.

In 2005 Lebanese Prime Minster Rafic Hariri was assassinated with the help of members of the Lebanese Future Movement party and likely the help of the US and France. This was a political blow to Assad within Lebanon, and he was also blamed for the assassination using media manipulation and prepared activists. Tens of thousands of Lebanese took to the streets to condemn the killing of Hariri including members of Syria’s closest allies Hizbullah and Amal. The media claimed that the crowds were against the Syrian Army presence in Lebanon. US and France tried to pressure Assad into reinforcing the Syrian Army in Lebanon to stabilize the country but Bashar withdrew all Syrian troops from Lebanon. This background gives the context accompanying president Assad’s reform attempts in Syria, where he had to face foreign powers from abroad and their agents from within. The current crisis is not a civil war or rebellion, but a foreign aggression against a sovereign nation.

 
Syria-is-a-Battle-for-Palestine0
 

1- “No word of truth from Erdogan”: Al- Assad

2- “Syria is a Battle for Palestine”

3- Arab League working for Whoms?

4- The Whys Enemies of Palestine are the enemies of Syria at the same time

 

Related posts:

 

 
About the author:
 
The author was born and lived in Damascus, Syria. He moved to Germany ten years ago and runs a company that organizes tourist groups to Syria. Before the conflict he went to Syria often to stay for days and months. He has been an outspoken defender of the Syrian government and has been targeted by the Free Syrian Army who destroyed his property and threatened his life, and so writes under the name Arabi Souri. This article was edited by Seth Rutledge
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Syrian Conflict Reaches Stalemate

April 4, 2013

 

A man walks past damaged houses on a street filled with debris in Deir al-Zour, April 1, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/ Khalil Ashawi)

By: Ziad Haydar Translated from As-Safir (Lebanon).
اقرا المقال الأصلي باللغة العربية
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad sent a message to the BRICS group, which met last week. He called on them to “help end the violence in Syria immediately,” thus imparting a political role to the emerging international group. Things in Syria are at a standstill politically with regard to the “major players” and very active with regard to the “minor players.” It is a standstill that helps achieve short- and medium-range objectives, none of which serve Syria’s long-term interests.

In his letter, Assad called on the BRICS countries to “work together for an immediate halt to the violence in Syria in order to ensure the success of a political solution, which requires a clear international will as well as the draining of the sources of terrorism and the stopping of their funding and arming. …The Syrian people look forward to working with the BRICS as a power that seeks to promote peace, security and cooperation among nations, away from domination, dictates and injustice, which were used for decades on our people and nation.”

The letter comes after Syrian presidential adviser Bouthaina Shaaban visited both India and South Africa in March, and a similar trip by Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal al-Miqdad to Brazil, China and Russia, where he tried to obtain clear support from those countries.

Since the BRICS group was formed in the last decade, it has represented for Damascus a counterweight to the US-led Western axis, which controls and influences international and regional organizations. The BRICS group tends to not interfere in the internal affairs of other states or in civil wars. That became apparent during the Libyan crisis when the BRICS group opposed Western intervention without being able to prevent it, which weakened the BRICS influence. Damascus wishes to see that influence grow.

In international forums, the BRICS group is consistent with Russian policy, which supports the Geneva Accord signed last June, and prefers avoiding direct intervention. Diplomats and observers have noted that Russia’s role, despite its continuity and persistence, seems less aggressive. That may be because of the escalation by France and Britain — with US approval — to change the Syrian balance of power on the ground, something being pushed by Qatar and Turkey as was apparent in the Arab summit in Doha.

Russia is apparently waiting for a change in the balance of power in the Syrian opposition. Russian diplomats think that the opposition is being held together by external forces, without which it would quickly disintegrate. But nobody in Damascus knows what will be the next step or has put forth a vision. The Russians are sitting back and waiting for their opponents to “fail.” Moscow is convinced that neither side is able to achieve a decisive victory and that 50 mortar rounds on Damascus per week means that the conflict is taking a new dimension of brutality. That also means that both sides are losing.

Russian policy is not exactly like that of Damascus. The Syrian leadership has not accepted the Geneva Accord without reservation but considers it worthy of “discussion.” So matters will be decided by the developments on the ground. A Syrian oppositionist said to As-Safir that “there will be a military and political escalation that reaches its peak in two months.” The Syrian oppositionist residing in Damascus said that the escalation is fully consistent with the US desire to “completely weaken Syria and take it out of the regional strategic plan for decades.”

In this context, it is remarkable that the Russian military has kept its battleship in Beirut, even though two weeks ago its destination was Tartous. Russian diplomatic sources told As-Safir that “this is something normal. It is a routine measure designed to deepen the friendly relations and cooperation between Lebanon and Russia,” and that this matter has nothing to do with the discovery of an electronic spy system on the Syrian coast, believed to be Israeli, or that it is part of Russian military moves.

Diplomats acknowledge that amid the deadlock, there are clear Qatari and Turkish preparations for the day after the regime falls, if it does fall. The two conferences in Cairo and Istanbul were part of those preparations. The first conference wanted to showcase the presence of Alawites in the opposition. The second conference was attended by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and was aimed at Syria’s Turkmen.

The conferences wanted to narrow the differences between the “resigned” leader of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces Moaz al-Khatib and some of the coaltion’s blocs over increasing the representation of Syrian minorities and expanding the opposition structure. The Americans and the Russians agree that Khatib “is irreplaceable as a leader of the opposition” and seek to keep him in place, especially in face of the rising Islamist militants in the opposition and the rising Muslim Brotherhood movement worldwide.

The Qatari and Turkish effort is also part of “the day after” plan, which has started considering “sectarian quotas” similar to those in Iraq and Lebanon.

All that recalls what happened in the summer of 2011, when official Turkish delegates asked Damascus about its “informal” opinion regarding sectarian quotas, whereby the key military centers will be held by the Christian and Muslim minorities and the bigger sects be given the primary role in the economy and political process. The vision included the possibility that the Muslim Brotherhood will return to Syria. But those ideas were immediately rejected at the time.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

SUMMARY OF PRESIDENT BASHAR AL-ASSAD’S INTERVIEW WITH TURKISH TV

April 4, 2013

Posted on April 3, 2013 by Libya 360°
Published on 3 Apr 2013

This release from Ulusal TV is an overview of the interview that took place at the presidential palace in Damascus with interviewers from Turkish Ulusal TV, the channel that will be airing the interview this coming Friday.

“Erdogan did not give any sincere statement since the crisis in Syria began,” Assad said in an interview with Turkey’s TV channel Ulusal Kanal. Excerpts from the interview were posted on Assad office’s YouTube channel on Wednesday. Station officials said the full interview will be broadcast Friday.

Assad also spoke to the channel’s newspaper, Aydinlik. Both media outlets are affiliated with Turkey’s Labor Party, which opposes Erdogan’s policies.
Ulusal Kanal’s website said the interview with Assad was conducted late Tuesday in one of the presidential places in Damascus.

Source: Ulusal TV

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!