|By Mylene Doublet O’Kane, Post graduate in Philosophy & History of Ideas, a teacher, a writer and an Israeli-French analyst in Geopolitics.
Over the past sixteen years, a Grand strategy of destabilization and of unleashed chaos in Central Asia and in the Middle East with a view to operating a balkanization of the latter while isolating Iran was implemented by the joint effort of the US Neocons, the CIA, the Pentagon and Saudi Arabia. However, Russia’s military involvement into the war against IS (former ISIS/ISIL) from September 2015, with Russian Sukhoi and ground units clearing areas after areas in less than six months, has proven the extent and nature of the western hypocritical immobilism over the previous years of the Syrian conflict. The goal was never to defeat IS. Actually concrete evidence finally emerge that several corridors have provided IS with both U.S. weaponry and a questionable freedom of movement all throughout the conflict, whereas clean carpet bombings would have drastically damaged a ridiculous army of pick up crossing Syria-Iraq deserted border and other virtually uninhabited territories in perfect impunity. Who sold them Toyota pick up in the first place ?
Many reports, including a MIT report suggest that US-backed “moderate rebels” rather than the Syrian regular Army would use sarin-gas or sarin-like substances on civilians in Ghouta attack, back in 2013 and in Khan Sheykhoun in April 2017. An international team of experts was denied access to the latter zone, only to serve a despicable lie and as moral justification for launching 59 missiles on two Syrian aircraft depots. The goal was never to bring democracy to Syria. The goal was always to balkanize the region accordingly to British strategist Halford Mackinder’s recommendation pioneered over a century ago through his analysis: “The Geopolitical Pivot of History” in which he formulated his imperative maxim:
“Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland.
Who rules the Heartland commands the world-Island.
Who rules the world-island commands the world”.
Indeed, the corresponding Heartland of his time was East Europe which can today largely be identified with contemporaneous Central Asia as a pivotal gateway to drastically influence all Eurasia. However, it is safe to admit that the Middle East can also play that role, if not better, given the Eurasian Balkans’ fragmentation and demographic irrigation into the entire region.
In other words, through an intentional destabilization of the Middle East, the chain reaction provokes quite inevitable recurring disruption in Central Asia, and vice-versa. In the 1990s, former Jimmy Carter National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski’s theoretical contribution to this geopolitical framework emerged from basic deductive reasoning. The innate ability of the center to influence the periphery does not hence require permanent physical presence. Massive destabilization in the Heartland (ie: U.S.-backed Islamic terrorist insurgencies, ethnical and sectarian divisions, ethnic cleansing provoked on purpose, humanitarian crises, State collapse and/or an aggregation of these latter factors with additional forces opportunistically put under wide propagandist one-sided media coverage) does not therefore allow non expert witnesses connect the dots between asymmetrical regional or so-called global threats and the indirectly instigating actors. Then, the first obvious question is: who are these instigators?
We’ve already mentioned the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, according to the wise Roman saying asking: cui bono? [Who could benefit from] such regional disruptions in the Middle East and in Central Asia? However, a third head is still missing to this modern Cerberus, as well as a logical justification for unrest chaos in these respective regions. The present article is meant to fill the gaps.
Secular Pan-Arab Republicanism / Pan-Islamic authoritative monarchism
In 1945, on his way back from Yalta’s conference on the USS Quincy, Roosevelt signed an agreement with King Saud of Arabia. A secured deal on oil supply was ratified in exchange of a 60 year-protection granted the Royal family and her monarchical regime. It was renewed by George.W. Bush in 2005, for the same period of time. King Saud’s initial main concern was to resist secular Pan-Arabism (ie: Syria, Iraq, Nasser in Egypt…). Hence, whereas these countries would develop progressive Republican form of regimes, the Saudis would strictly recognize and support authoritarian monarchisms, thus putting the two Middle-Eastern ideologies at odds with one another and motivating the Wahhabis [Saudi Arabia’s Sunni Islam preaching a strict application of the Sharia Law] to find external support able to eliminate the most pressing threat to their ideological existence. It was through this imperative, namely the challenge that secular pan-Arab republicanism posed to extremist pan-Islamic authoritative monarchism, that the Wahhabis determined themselves to join the American exceptionalist hegemony. Over the decades, in funding and in arming Sunni Islamic groups to overthrow secular governments in Muslim countries, Saudi-led Sunni militant takfirism [the practise of excommunicating alleged “apostate Muslims” and the recourse to ultra-violence] has intentionally incited sectarian warfare into Secular Pan-Arab republican regimes. Indeed, not only is Wahhabism strictly positioned to divide Arabs from their secular governments, but it also forces each of these citizens to reconsider their most basic identity, thus making them more vulnerable to sectarian warfare. Therefore, it is safe to say that Wahhabism has ever matched and served the interests of the American exceptionalist ambition to control the Middle East [and the world, according to Mackinder and Brzezinski’s theories], and that Israel was positioned to become the United States’ best ally.
The Israeli position
Whether one intends to call it or not Zionism, many Jews believe that they have a special relationship with God and an historical imperative to recreate the Biblical Jewish state as conquered by King David, which thus gives their leadership the right to do whatever is deemed to be in their global interests. Over the past millennia, it is no understatement to say that Jews have come through horrific persecutions on the old continent or else, they’ve been forced into dhimmitude status under Islamic governance. Therefore, as soon as given a part of their land back, on November 29 1947, they have sworn to never let it go again.
- Does this tragic destiny morally allow Israel to be provided with a permanent and unlimited license to kill? One can answer this question by 2 other basic questions at least : Who started the war at the dawn of November 30th 1947? How many Jews did Arab nationalist-led pogroms kill under the previous British mandate ?
- Is antisemitism a consequentialist phenomenon which has forced Israel’s strong position in the world? Possibly, and I am afraid that antisemitism is as old as Judaism itself.
Under these circumstances, with the memory of having been betrayed by the French and British empires [1916 Sikes-Picot agreements] and with the factual knowledge of being surrounded by the “Ummah” [the world of Islam, namely 25 Muslim countries], the modern State of Israel was offered little other choice but to look forward to dividing and ruling over the Middle East, one way or another, to secure its own possibility of existence. In this respect, Oded Yinon’s plan has served as an instrumental basis. Should anyone be ready to throw the first stone, I shall invite him to put himself in my people’s shoes.
This being clearly stated, should you look forward to ensuring a total domination over a strategic heartland, not only do you need foreign friends, but you also need to commit them to behave accordingly in a long and steady process. In other words, to control and secure their financial assets, their ideological and technical capacities of operations as well as their propaganda’s dissemination through media and NGOs organizations is a categorical imperative on the grand geopolitical chessboard. American exceptionalism and its successive Administrations’ belief that they represent a “special” elite entitled to break established rules and enact a plethora of double standard policies in order to shape the world according to their design was therefore, Israel’s most obvious ally. American Exceptionalism’s empowerment and support of Zionism was reciprocally meant to create a proxy partner that had a shared interest in militarily unraveling Arab unity, which is exactly what the ultimate result of the Arab-Israeli wars has proved to achieve over the many decades. To neutralize the military capacity of Arab unity was crucial in the sense that only through Arab unity could there be a chance of defeating Israel and accordingly remove the U.S.’ intergenerational perch in the Mideast.
Put simply, the U.S. needs Israel’s strategic location and regional military contracting and innovative services to keep Arab governments perpetually weak and divided, while Israel needs the U.S.’ full-spectrum support to ensure its own perennation. This explains our three-headed Cerberus; (The U.S.-Israel-Saudi Arabia), with for the first couple an intensive depth of mutual support. This also explains the moderation of Saudi Arabia’s policies towards Israel. Takfirism, which defines Wahhabism, is nothing more than rhetorical slogans against the Jewish State designed to spread a marketing campaign for more naïve recruits, although certain Wahhabi elements regularly try to take advantages of regional “opportunities” or vulnerabilities. Quite obviously, this Grand Chessboard strategy presents the additional but crucial advantage of securing the Anglo-American oligarchy’s grab for the region’s extensive oil, natural gas and mineral wealth. Similar comments may apply regarding Afghanistan’s tremendously rich soil and vis-à-vis the U.S. presence in as many as 53 African countries, although almost gone unnoticed.
The significance of the Syrian conflict and beyond
Considering what was previously stated, the dying war in Syria can be translated as the most pivotal Eurasian resistance against the American Exceptionalist-Zionist-Wahhabi alliance for the excellent reason that Syria represents the last vestige of secular pan-Arab governance due to the ideological foundations of the shia Ba’ath Party. This qualifies the country as the most resistant and defiant state in Israel’s nearest vicinity with the support of Russia, Iran and China whose humanitarian project of creating new silk “belt” roads and maritime routes (The Belt and Road Initiative or BRI) which shall link the 5 inhabited continents at term, thus bringing economic opportunities to as many participating countries, would also signal the agony of the American imperialism over the many nations of the world. Really? Maybe not. Many enthusiastic African leaders have already concluded contracts in billions with China combined with the additional target of cracking down poverty on the continent. Nevertheless, the quite opposite purpose of CIA psy-op, of U.S. private military compagnies of mercenaries (PMC) operating cheaper than regular army and worldwide as well as additional U.S military presence all across Africa is meant to morally justify an illegal interference into 53 over 54 African “sovereign” countries.
For instance, while China is constructing bicoastal railways in Africa,the U.S. special forces’ presence in oil strategic regions such as Niger and in other regions (South Sudan, the Central African Republic…) manufacture civil wars, ethnic cleansing, Christian-Muslim clashes etc.… which would eventually turn these countries into a “failed state belt” preventing their crucial incorporation into a Chinese-built bicoastal Silk Road through their gigantic natural resources. (Nota bene : GDP = PIB in French/ Source OCDE = OECD). Grey zones are countries for which enquiries have repeatedly been denied to Academics.
The 2011 U.S.-led NATO’s operation to topple Colonel Muammar Gadaffi in Libya, which was designed to shatter the balance that the Colonel had managed to maintain among the Tuaregs and other tribal groups not only on his own territory but also in various other regions in the Sahel, including Niger, was directly tied to the utilization of Al Qaeda elements by Washington and France, as first partner in crime, in order to destabilize the entire area for further neocolonialism [natural resources’ grabs].
Furthermore, China, Russia and their major trading partner countries inside the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) as well as their Eurasian partner countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) are completing the final architecture of a new monetary alternative to the dollar (USD), while the U.S. has recently embarked in an intimidating and bullying campaign against its traditional allies, threatening them to not accept Chinese Direct Investments into their economies anymore on the most disgraceful grounds of “security reasons”. Nevertheless, Germany, which benefited from 37 over 39 Chinese direct investments in 2015, but also Austria whose scientists jointly with Chinese counterparts have invented a quantic computer technology for Chinese space programs soon allowing many BRI’s countries to communicate together faster and safer, are so far reluctant to abide to absurdity. On the contrary, although capital is very much needed to secure the final achievement, Anglo-American selfish interests and dirty covered tricks worldwide have forced PM Theresa May to decline China’s investment offer into the French-British project of EPR (last nuclear reactor’s generation) nuclear plant currently under construction at Hinkley point C , U.K. Theresa May has motivated her refusal through a lame excuse, stating that in case of major geopolitical instability, the United Kingdom couldn’t afford to allow the Chinese the possibility of cutting power off on the Island. How diplomatic a comment, isn’t it? In that case, what would France suggest considering her 57 nationwide-spread nuclear plants representing an exceptional nuclear bomb, should Europe ever be attacked? If the U.K. has a future outside of the European Union; it has to learn how to set free from the old partition of the world. Unipolarity would sink a one-time Great Empire, regardless of the questionable way it has behaved toward the Chinese nation in the 19th century. A part in Donald Trump’s November-planned visit to China is expected to remind Xi Jinping that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which backs the belt and road (BRI) strategy, has a cooperation framework agreement with the US-led World Bank. President Trump may wish to express U.S. business interests in belt and road projects, while pressing Xi to ensure greater transparency and openness to international competitive bidding. The pot calling the kettle black, isn’t it?
Aside from China and Russia, the SCO full members include Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and most recently India and Pakistan. The U.S. interests should therefore look forward to escalating ethnical tensions on these borders, especially between pakistan and India. Meanwhile, this is a population of well over 3 billion people, some 42% of the entire world population, uniting together in a coherent, sensible, bold, peaceful economic and political cooperation. By extension, if we add to the SCO member countries, the official Observer States—Afghanistan, Belarus, Iran and Mongolia; all of which having expressed wish to formally join as full members; a glance at the world map objectifies the impressive potentials of the emerging SCO. Turkey is a formal dialogue Partner seriously exploring possible SCO membership application, as are Sri Lanka, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cambodia and Nepal. Combined with several Latin American and African countries, the overall, simply said, is breathtaking.
Lastly, on the Pacific front, the greatest threat to the multipolar world’s economic relations with ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations which have implemented a free trade zone since 1992) comes directly from the TPP, although hardly any American people have realized it. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) or the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), is a trade agreement between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States (until 23 January 2017) and Vietnam. Therefore, although kept behind closed doors because President Trump has campaigned for TTP’s repeal, the U.S. is still pushing this exclusionary trade arrangement in an attempt to compromise the existing trade partnerships that non-allied countries (Russia and China) plan on launching with each of the bloc’s members. In using its economic and geopolitical hegemony in the region, the United States hopes to discourage or bully away TPP’s ASEAN members from these 2 major multipolar actors and to firmly lock them up into the unipolar block. This policy doesn’t cancel a more politically correct attempt… or trap. As the elements of America’s higher standards are now mostly lost with the collapse of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, if the U.S. is willing to take an active part in negotiations benefitting to a greater extent from the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), which covers the 21 economies of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation bloc including the U.S., these higher standards may be reinserted into the Asia-Pacific free trade area.
“Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer” in ‘The Art of War’, Sun Tzu, Chinese military commander and strategist (544 BCE – 496 BCE)
Back to the Middle-East, what future for Syria and Iraq?
Follow the oil and gas deposits is the best answer that we could provide on this subject, although this map does not reflect deposits controlled by Proxy ISIS any longer.
While the western leaders and media have provided very little and unconvincing explanation as to how militants from a so-called auto proclaimed Islamic State (IS) managed to emerge, expand, and fight for almost 7 years against the joint military power of Syria, Iraq, Iran and Russia, it is crystal clear to many experts and rational minds that the IS terrorist organization has been receiving US-led NATO’s reinforcements in artillery and supplies from farther west beyond Syria’s and Iraqi’s borders. An army of pick up can do a lot, but unicorns in the garden DO NOT exist. The US-Soviet Union proxy war in Afghanistan (1979/1988) can serve as best example. This being stated, additional guidelines may be of some importance.
On September 18th 2017, the French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian (unchanged after President François Hollande’s departure) suggested at the 193-member United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York, the necessity of creating a “contact group” to discuss the Syrian topic. For those familiar with the French language and with the subtle cultural art of diplomacy à la française, this statement signaled a final end to the 101-year-old secret partition of the Middle East between the French and British empires in 1916, also known as the “Sykes-Picot agreements”.
In the meantime, although having just publically declared before the U.N. that “his position will always stand by the forgotten and persecuted people”, namely the Kurds fighting for an Independent State potentially stretching from eastern Turkey Anatolia’s region to northern Iraq, President Macron back-scenes’ meeting with Turkish President Erdogan would give an unconditional French support against the constitution of a free Kurdistan. How French a behavior, isn’t it?
The initial talks on a “democratic transition in Syria” took place between February 23rd and March 3rd 2017 in Geneva; a United Nations Security Council format under which the so-called Syrian opposition [a mixed gathering of U.S.-backed Sunni terrorist groups including IS and Al Qaeda’s Jabhat al-Nusra] could voice their demands to the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Although this unilateral initiative was manifestly doomed to fail, it can be summed up as follow:
- In 2015, Assad proposed a 6-week unilateral unconditional ceasefire in Aleppo. UN envoy to Syria, Staffan de Mistura, took it to the table but the proposition was predictably rejected by Cerberus-proxy terrorists. The envoy didn’t follow it up. Aleppo was destroyed by [Al qaeda] al-Nusra militants, or should we say “the moderate Rebels” in order to be politically correct…
- Although De Mistura declared that the “Geneva talks aim to explore if there is an opportunity to make progress in regards to a political settlement”, it was crystal clear from the early beginning of the war that a “political settlement” was a pure rhetorical argument for the excellent reason that the Cerberus [The U.S.-Israel-Saudi Arabia]-manipulated “Syrian opposition” expected nothing less than the extermination of Shias and the overthrow of the Alawites’ Dynasty (a branch of Shia Islam common to Bashar al-Assad and to the King of Morocco for instance) ; a latter country where I was born and that I cherish.
- In September 2015, the first Russian Sukhoi aircrafts dropped bombs on terrorists in northern Syrian Latakia ‘s region (Russian strategic base giving a unique access to the Mediterranean sea)
- In late November, 2016, De Mistura proposed to give East Aleppo “autonomy in exchange for peace”. East of the Euphrates is the region which concentrates major Syrian oil reserves .This proposal perfectly echoes my initial comment (follow the oil)
- In December, 2016, EU’s High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and President of the Council, Federica Mogherini and De Mistura, presented a joint “political inclusive solution” whose feasibility blueprint has never showed up…
- In May, 2017, De Mistura expressed his concerns about a “legal vacuum” forming as a result of a “political transition” or a “political settlement”; the basis of which was never determined.
- Another U.S.-led meeting is planned to be held in the coming weeks.
Should we also mention that back in October 2016, France’s Minister of Foreign affairs Le Drian drafted a bill proposing a “No-fly zone over Aleppo” which would have conveniently given the coalition plenty room to pass and reload “moderate” rebels’ artillery while, at the same time, would have offered extra time to intensify IS militants’ relocation to Afghanistan ? It thus comes as no surprise that Russia and China vetoed this absurd but quite revealing French proposal.
Should we also mention that it wasn’t until after Turkey shot down a Russian Su-24 jet (while at the same time hiding under NATO’s skirt) with the populace almost lynching the other pilot, that Russia was finally able to negotiate directly with U.S.’ proxy master – Erdogan? As a broader result, no longer would Saudi Arabia send money to Turkey to finance the training of ‘moderate’ rebels, who were thrown into the Syrian war operating theater across both the Jordanian – through the US/EU training camp – and Turkish borders. No longer would the “Free Syrian Army” and Jabhat al-Nusra fight side by side, most notably after Aleppo’s liberation.
Turkey’s dreams of annexing Aleppo had come to an end, and instead of looking forward to implementing the conditions for a responsible and transparent dialogue, the U.S. switched from using al-Qaeda in the East of the country, to using the “obedient and hopeful” Kurds in the north.
After U.S.-led 2016 failed coup in Turkey thanks to the Iranian intelligence, and just weeks after Saudi Arabia-Qatar rift instigated by Trump’s blackmailing, a common zone of Russia’s and Turkey’s interests finally pushed Erdogan to abandon the counter-productive Geneva talks’ format and instead, to joint into the Astana talks – first held in January 2017 hosting Iran, Russia and several other countries. The United States declined the invitation. In other words, NATO-Turkey’s move was to be considered as a decisive convergence between Erdogan’s and Tehran’s interests, namely their shared refusal vis-à-vis a possible independent Kurdistan. Iran has a population of 2 million Kurdish citizens that it is not willing to lose. As for Turkey, Kurds are the largest ethnic minority composing between 15% and 20% of the Turkish population, while Eastern Anatolia – which the Kurds view as historical Northern Kurdistan- is worth 25% of the entire territory. Considering that the Iraqi central government has no plan to abandon gigantic oil capacities located in Kirkuk (former northern autonomous Kurdish province until IS’ takeover), we thus assist to an astonishing line of convergence including Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey and possibly largely Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon with, at the same time, Sunni Qatar, Bahrein, Kuwait and Iran sharing economic interests . To put it different, the Grand “New Middle-East” strategy reveals to be a massive failure with Iranian IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) and Hezbollah fighters being stronger and more popular than hardly ever before in the region.
Within the past 5 months, talks in Astana (Kazakhstan) have given many effective results
- The creation of “deconfliction zones” –designed to reconcile as many militants as possible with Damascus
- The inclusion of Idlib in the “deconfliction zones”.
- The sale of Russian S-400 missiles to Turkey and progress with Turkish Stream.
Without a shadow of a doubt, a substantial reason why Turkey was actively willing to hand over Idlib’s region is based on the fact that Ankara sees the new Silk Roads (BRI), the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), the BRICS’ organization, the Turkish Stream, etc. as the future of the Middle-East. Although Idbil has been included into the “deconfliction zones”, earlier last tuesday the conservative Turkish daily newspaper Yeni Şafak published an interesting article reporting that:
“The Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) is going to establish 8 military bases in Syria’s Idlib province. The Taftanaz Air Base and the Abu al-Duhur Military Airbase [in Syria’s Idlib province] are also two separate points that the TAF uses (…) The Syrian Arab Army’s largest garrison in the vicinity of the Deif region is now controlled by Turkish forces”.
What is high significant is that the TAF entered Syria’s Idlib province under a pretext of “implementing” the de-escalation zones’ agreement reached by Tehran, Ankara and Moscow during the Astana talks on the Syrian conflict. Furthermore, the Turkish military announced that “it established the first observation post on October 13”. Hence, considering that no clashes between the TAF and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham [formerly Jabhat al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda] have been reported as of today, there is a serious reason to believe that Turkey has managed to conclude some kind of deal with the terrorist group ; one of the most influential “opposition” faction in the province.
For those unfamiliar with the topic, what’s the Turkish stream?
As I have repeatedly written on the subject, the war in Ukraine (2014) was a U.S.-led failed “Regime change” attempt which had nothing to do with freeing the Ukrainian people from some absurd and exhausted “Red scare” rhetoric. The U.S. State Department already had the back-headed idea of forcing Europe into a deal with American energy contractors or with Gulf Monarchy-Islamist supporters’ rather than with the Russian ones[ Nordstream 2], regardless of the many economic losses for the European companies involved in the sector. In this respect, Washington’s intent was to establish a de facto blockade which would prevent the flow of Russian gas to the European Union.
As mentioned in TASS, January 14, 2015 : “The South Stream gas pipeline worth €15.5 billion was intended to pump 67 billion cubic meters of Russian natural gas to Europe annually. The pipeline’s underwater section 900 km (559 miles) long was intended to run along the bed of the Black Sea from the Russkaya compressor station on the Russian shore to the Bulgarian coast.”
Considering the U.S.-led inflammatory situation in Ukraine and subsequent U.S.–forced EU sanctions on Russia, President Vladimir Putin announced on Dec 1, 2014 that “the project to build the South Stream gas pipeline was closed due to the European Union’s unconstructive approach to cooperation, including Bulgaria’s decision [pressured by the US] to stop the construction of the pipeline’s stretch on its territory.”
Consequently, the “South Stream” was replaced by the “Turkish Stream”; the scrapping of which was coupled with an historic signing ceremony in Ankara between presidents Vladimir Putin and Recyyp Erdogan on the very same month. Under the Russian-Turkish agreement pertaining to gas pipeline routes, Turkey was promised a key player role, as the country would become a major hub and transit route for the export of Russian natural gas to both Southern and Western Europe.
Upon the U.S. Congress’ insistence and President Trump’s submission to new round of sanctions against Iran/IRGC and Russia resulting from [Neocons-AIPAC-White House Zionist joint efforts] and at the same time, considering the fast deteriorating relationships between President Trump and Turkey, the new reality involves Iran and Turkey deciding not only the outcome of the Syrian war [thus of the Middle-East], but also the future of Europe on both economic and immigration policies. Will Israel manage to somehow overthrow Erdogan from the Grand Chessboard? If he is shrewd enough to engage into an even closer rapprochement vis-à-vis Iran, Russia and potentially China under the BRI’s format, Turkey’s exit from NATO is a serious option to consider.
What about Israel?
With Hezbollah units and Shiite militias being stationed as close as 25 km from Syria-Israel Golan Heights’ border, in the region of Masyaf, the whole situation is not encouraging. Earlier last month, Israeli Defense Forces reported to have shot down an Iranian drone flying over the Golan Heights. Officials later went on declaring that “the Syrian opposition [which is formed of Kurds and various Sunni terrorist groups including IS, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (former Al Qaeda’s Jabhat al Nusra) and other local rebel groups] reported an Iranian presence in Tal Al-Sha’ar area, Tal Al-Ahmar and Division 90 headquarters; all in the vicinity of the border. Israel also insisted that Hezbollah al-Nujaba; an Iraqi Shiite force supported by Iran has formed “a Golan Liberation” unit which declares itself “ready to take action”, while senior figures from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Basij have been photographed in areas close to the border.
Over the past weeks, an accumulation of similar reports has given access to the hard reality that Israel is currently experiencing. In a recent article, Jonathan Spyer, senior research fellow at Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA/ Rubin Center) located at interdisciplinary center (IDC-Herzliya-il) has, in a quite puzzling way, referred to Israel as the Cerberus’ third head :
“ Israeli military jets have struck Hezbollah and Syrian regular army facilities and convoys dozens of times during Syria’s civil war, with the goal of preventing the transfer of weapons systems from Iran to Hezbollah via Syria (…) With the prospect of pro-Iranian forces reaching Bukamal on the Syrian-Iraqi border, this opens up the possibility of much-reported Iranian ‘land corridor’ stretching uninterrupted from Iran itself to a few kilometers from the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights Hezbollah. In Syria, the insurgent efforts of the Sunni Islamists had at least the benefit of distracting the attentions of the more formidable enemy –The Iran-led regional bloc. For five years, Israel was largely able to sit by while Sunni and Shiite political Islam were at death’s embrace just north and east of the border. Russian and Iranian intervention, however, appears to have tipped the balance against the Sunni rebels, threatening to bring the long chapter of active civil war in Syria to close“.
What we learn from this statement clearly admits Israel’s benefit from provoking and supporting regional chaos regardless of hundreds of thousands civilian fatalities, of millions moved to refugee camps, of subsequent dramatic migration of Muslim asylum seekers to European countries while, at the same time, the international community has so far been offered Israeli massive media campaigns promoting how closely Syrian wounded civilians were being nursed by Israeli medical units. It also bluntly indicates that political Islam is actually what has played in favor of Israel’s best interests on the regional scale over the past years.
How disastrous is the situation for Israel?
The Golan Heights
After talks with commanders inside the Hezbollah speaking under anonymous status, it clearly appears that the recent de-escalation deal has given the organization time and room to deploy in South Syria. Although Hezbollah’s presence is not currently situated in the immediate area of Syria-Israel’s border, commanders however admit that reconnaissance missions are completed on a regular basis. They also insist that the Hezbollah is equipped with enhanced weapons able to strike at the Israeli front within minutes, should tensions heat up with their foes. “Our physical presence near the border is not necessary”. Consequently, they mention that during last summer, fighters were moved from the Syrian front to both reinforce the organization’s positions in Lebanon but most notably to build new networks of tunnels and bunkers, and several training camps in the Bekaa Valley. As an overall result, Israel is faced with a double-front nightmarish and inflammatory situation [north and north-east] forcing Israeli actions throwing oil on the fire with the hope of putting the Syrian war on the back burner. Israel’s obvious obstacle to its domination on the Middle-East, should I insist again not for colonialist reasons but to only have a right to exist, has always been Iran. However, although Israel could confront Iran, which the Israeli Defense Forces would quite predictably defeat, this move would immediately initiate WW3 for the most imbecilic reason that some smart minds believe that Russia and the United States have opposite interests. Nevertheless, as irrational as it may seem, there are two options left that have quite surprisingly been ignored by the Israeli leadership so far.
Why are all eyes currently focused on Deir ez Zor and Badia’s region ?
In the Syrian region of Deir ez-Zor, U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), also known as the Free Syrian Army (FSA) is composed of Kurds, although these are mostly concentrated in the north, of U.S.-hired local mercenaries and of Sunni moderate terrorist groups; all fighting against the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), Shia militia and other forces loyal to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Both camps are currently competing for the capture of the former Islamic State (IS) territory.
Badia’s region, which is covering 85% of Jordan and 55% of central and southeastern parts of Syria represent a strategic stake, as this ‘uninterrupted corridor’ connects Syria with Iraq and Iraq with Iran. Considering that Israel has a steady peace agreement with Jordan also positioned as a US-NATO air-base, it is of the utter importance for Israel that the coalition put a [proxy] hold on a portion of Badia’s region in order to cut the related Iran-Golan Heights and Iran-Lebanon direct hinterland hub. Quite unsurprisingly, Hezbollah is currently extremely active in this key region. Iran is largely relying on Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba, an armed Shiite faction to secure a supply route through Iraq to Damascus roaming through a number of secondary Iraqi cities including Qayrawan. If the outcome of the ground conflict proves unable to implement such a scenario , all diplomatic efforts should press Russia to comply with this aim, should Russia be ready to prove that it is not a foe to the Jewih State.
Deir Ez-Zor is located on the banks of the River Euphrates, which divides the governorate into two parts. Its geographical location is the eastern gateway of Syria that links Syrian governorates to Iraq. Additionally, the area contains 40% of the oil reserves in Syria as well as gas fields such as Thayyem field, minutes away from the city center. These features alone justify that the battle will be fierce for its military takeover. Furthermore, Mayadin and Bukamal, 2 cities stretching along the border with Iraq are quite logically of equal strategic importance to control. A Hezbollah commander has declared that “More than 8,000 Hezbollah fighters are involved in eastern Syria. 70% of the area has already been captured. The Iranians and Russians agreed on the strategic decision to capture all of Badia”
Over the past weeks, Syrian government troops and their allied militias have been racing for the control of the Euphrates River region. Some pro-regime militias have indeed even managed to cross it. The Euphrates had so far served as a dividing line between pro-Al Assad militias and the U.S.-backed SDF. In an interview to the Kurdish news website Rudaw on sept 15 2017, a SDF official made it crystal clear that Syrian army forces would be denied the possibility of crossing the Euphrates River in Deir ez-Zor province by all means. Moments after, in an interview with hezbollah’s Al Manar TV, Bouthaina Shaaban, Assad’s top aide stated that “the Syrian government will fight any force, including US-backed SDF forces battling IS militants, but the Lebanese militant group will not be involved in any fight against Kurdish forces. Kurds are not our enemies. They worked with us in many places, and I don’t think [a war with them] is a possibility. (…) We are an army. A joint operating room led by Iran, Hezbollah and the Syrian military runs the operation in Deir ez-Zor. (…) Hezbollah is usually responsible for offensive operations. Their troops are generally followed by Syrian ones responsible for stabilizing various areas. Engineering units of Hezbollah decide as well on the establishment of headquarters and the division of tasks and decide on the number of logistics units required. (…) The Badia is a difficult landscape. You can be somewhere and you find yourself someplace else because of the desert storms that suddenly appear. We lost 18 martyrs between Sukhna and Deir ez-Zor. IS encircled us. We were deployed on eight front lines. They used trucks of 1 ton to attack us, and our men ended up burned alive. Despite the ferocity of the fights with IS in Deir ez-Zor, Hezbollah made a deal with the extremist group Aug. 27, evacuating hundreds of IS fighters and their families from a pocket of territory on the northeast Lebanese-Syrian border into militant-held eastern Syria. This decision was completely justified. As Muslims, we do not kill prisoners. Sayed Hassan [Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s chief] is human. If the battle required a change of position, what is the big deal?”.
What’s worth Russia-Israel’s “friendship?
Israel is the home of over 1 million Russian speakers with deep roots into the Russian culture. Russian is the second most spoken language in Israel and anyone who would deny the incredible strength of the bonds linking this hard working and smart community would position himself as a pathological liar. It is also important to notice that although they all feel Israeli; they have kept an incredible tenderness for their original homeland, regardless of what decades of dissident-oriented speeches, testimonies and literature have intentionally fabricated in the West. Many Russians have helped and/or saved Jewish people lives- whether while into extermination camps and/or out of camps- and this reality will endlessly remain written in the sky. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has just paid his first-ever visit to Israel; quite ironically arriving on the same day that a Syrian anti-aircraft missile system was reportedly destroyed by the Israeli Air Force “after a jet had flown over Lebanon on a reconnaissance mission” but which Damascus said had strayed into Syrian airspace, provoking western comments on whether this surprising timing would interfere or would translate a certain Israeli tone into the visit.
All throughout the so-called ” War against IS”, it is noteworthy to mention that at no time did Russia stop Israel from bombing any targets in Syria, accordingly to the 2015 military coordination agreement that the two sides signed just immediately before Moscow’s decisive anti-terrorist intervention in the country. Over the past decade, Israel has been able to carry out multiple “reconnaissance missions”, crossing the Syrian space without any retaliation.
Shoigu’s visit was actually meant to reassure Israel that the “de-escalation zone” in Syria’s south west region shall not lead to a clandestine buildup of Tehran-back forces along Syria’s border with the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. In this respect, Shoigu insisted that Russia’s “Ummah pivot” due to Cerberus’ repetitive tricks is not directed against the Jewish State’s interests but on the contrary, it could be in support of them so long as Israel agrees not to undermine Moscow’s fragile balancing strategy in the Middle-East. Although it is no secret that president Putin and PM Bibi Netanyahu are very close friends, friendship deserves core evidence which might be the reason why Tel Aviv has recently asked Moscow to take steps in order to limit the “post-[western made-up] IS war” influence of Hezbollah and of the IRGC in Syria. The main problem is that the Anglo-American interests in the region don’t quite match this scenario. Oil and natural reserves are at stake, not to mention a Middle-East region able to drastically influence the entire Eurasian continent thus de facto, which has the capacity of jeopardizing China’s ambitions as a leader of a multipolar world.
IS (Former ISIS/ISIL): an asset of western intelligence agencies and governments
It is no secret to any honest intellectual or sensible mind that the Sunni terrorist organization was directly armed, funded, facilitated and/or allowed to develop unhindered with the aim to serve a long-planned purpose in Syria and Iraq. As the secret Aug 12, 2012 US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document obtained by Judicial Watch revealed, the U.S. has deliberately promoted the spread of the Islamic State since, at least, 2012 in order to use it as a weapon against the Bashar al-Assad government. The document clearly stated that:
“(…) There is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist Principality in eastern Syria [the Islamic State], and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).”
At that time, former CIA contractor Steven Kelly and current White House Chief of Staff also testified that
“Washington created ISIL for the sake of Israel. A never-ending war in the Middle East is the way to make the Jewish state the dominant regional power and to provide a constant flow of orders for weapons from the military-industrial complex at home (…) ISIS fighters are recruited from scores of countries, including Western ones.”
To be politically neutral, including Former VP Joe Biden has said that “America’s closest ally supports ISIS”.
Furthermore, it will come as no surprise to the public attention that NATO’s Intelligence agencies such as Turkish intelligence agency (MIT) has been facilitating ISIS militants crossing the border into Syria during most of the six-year conflict, as well as supporting a global network of Sunni terrorists to as far away as the Xinjiang province of China, where the Chinese authorities arrested at least ten Turkish suspects alleged to have organized the illegal border crossings of a number of Uighur [Muslim ethnic group in Western China] extremists in January 2015, for instance. It has further been revealed that the Uighur extremists were planning to travel to Syria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to train and fight with fellow jihadis. In the wake of a new U.S. war machine campaign in Afghanistan, China has wisely moved substantial military units to secure her north western border with Tajikistan; a direct corridor to Afghanistan.
Additionally, including former Afghan President Hamid Karzai, himself no stranger to the machination of US intelligence [as he owes the U.S. government his former position], bluntly declared in December 2014 that ISIS could not possibly have expanded into Afghanistan “without a foreign hand, without foreign backing”.
Let’s face the unbearable truth. In Syria, Iraq and in Afghanistan so far, ISIS has essentially done the “dirty” work for the United States and its Gulf and Israeli and Turkish allies. In Libya, ISIS has become a dominant terrorist force led by a documented U.S. asset named Abdelhakim Belhadj. Anyone who would conduct a honest investigation on this person – a one-time Al Qaeda terrorist turned into an ISIS commander – would find out that since 2011, the U.S. and its NATO allies have held up the terrorist as a “freedom fighter “bravely combatting” against the “tyrannical despot” Gaddafi whose security forces, at one time, captured and imprisoned many members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), including Belhadj.
In Yemen, ISIS has perpetrated and claimed responsibility for a number of terrorist actions in support of the Saudis – and by extension the US-UK alliance – against the Shia Houthi rebels and their allies; the whole scenario resulting in barbaric acts of intentional famine on civilians due to a prolonged maritime blockade. Therefore, it is safe to say that IS has proven a very effective coalition-led soldier in furthering the US-NATO-Israel-GCC’s (Gulf Cooperation Council) agenda.
Why has ISIS, with other US-NATO-led Sunni terrorist groups, been relocated in Afghanistan? The answer includes a broader scale-plan which is both meant to isolate Iran while hurting China’s economic project of New silk roads (BRI) already developed.
Towards a Multipolar World order ?
Saudi Arabia: A hot seat or a pivotal Monarchy?
Although hardly echoed by the western media, Saudi Arabia’s Royal Highness King Salman Al Saud has paid an official visit to the Kremlin earlier in October which may reshuffle old geopolitical alliances in the very next future. As previously mentioned, the US-Israel-IGC-led plan of overthrowing Bashar al-Assad in Syria ends up into what will go down in history as one of the largest fiascos, considering the numbers of sacrificed civilians and of dollars spent over a U.S.-led 16 year- Grand Strategy of destabilization and Regime change. Moreover, bridges between Sunni and Shia Islam (Turkey, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and Iran) seem stronger than ever before, while Hamas, Hezbollah and proxies have created a common momentum.
Under these circumstances, there is a very credible possibility that King Salman might de-dollarize both Saudi Arabia’s gigantic sovereign funds dedicated to his “New vision 2030” and/or energy contracts with his non-Western partners. Such moves would immediately translate into the assassination of the “Petrodollar”, while boosting the “Yuan-oil”. Other signs of deterioration in the US-Saudi relationship have been recently noticed by most geopolitical observers, especially following Saudi fast-moving rapprochement with Russia and a $130 billion’s worth of deals that the monarchy signed with China.
Is Saudi Arabia preparing to shift to the New Multipolar Order? Has King Salman somehow been informed of a possible U.S. “Deep State” coup in preparation against his monarchy with a view to Balkanizing his own Kingdom through the hybrid war mechanisms of a rebelling clergy, a Western-orchestrated domestic terrorist insurgency and/or a royalist plot, as part of many other options ? If his Royal Highness wants to save his sovereign state and secure Saudi Arabia’s future, which needs to diversify its sources of revenues, these two multipolar realignments are the beginning of a long series. Meanwhile, in operating this pivot, his Royal Highness is taking the risk of accelerating the coup. In no way is it a question of possibility of such outcome, but rather a matter of timing and of shrewd anticipation. Recently, his Royal Highness the Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has publically stated that his reign will be dedicated to the double task of operating a transition from Wahhabism to a moderate form of Sunni Islam and to pave the way to Saudi Arabia’s westernization. Although the Crown Prince is known for his attraction for democratic rules and the Western joyful decadence, does he quite realize that at the same time, these unprecedented paths would condemn Saudi Arabia? If we want to get cynical, and geopolitics admits this factor as part of Machiavelli’s theory [The end justifies the means], what would be the purpose of a democratic Sunni country? We have abundantly developed how it has served to fulfill the modern Cerberus’ goals; Support to the U.S. dollar, avoid the reunification of the great Pan-Arab nation and/or crush secular Arab republics
Furthermore, a possible de-escalation of the proxy War on Yemen [thus against Iran] and his ability to terminate the supremacy of a crippled U.S. dollar are elements which increasingly turn King Salman into the “Saudi Saddam” position. If he was ever allowed to turn a welcoming eye to the Titan of the Multipolar world, namely China, that should exclusively be under the U.S. close scrutiny and under terms that would favor his Anglo-American “ally”. Well, the King happens to be a happy dissident who has allow his country take its own first steps in the world. During the visit, agreements to sell S-400 anti-air missile systems and to set up Kalashnikov production plant in Riyadh have been made ; moves which can be translated as a strong basis for strengthening long-term and strategic relations. Additionally, Kornet-M anti-tank missiles, TOS-1A ‘Buratino’ heavy flame systems and automatic AGS-30 grenade launchers are contracts objectifying that including Russia’s non-traditional partners praise the quality of highly performant Russian weaponry. Moreover, the construction of a nuclear plant may be expected. This would allow Saudi Arabia the production of its own electricity. It is still unclear whether or not a military nuclear option was discussed; a perspective that both Israel and Iran would consider as direct threats to their respective security. Nevertheless, with the understanding that the United States is not willing to comply with the non-proliferation Treaty on Nuclear weapons, although its narrative has signaled quite the opposite on many occasions over the past seventy years, Russia’s 21st century grand ambition envisions to become a supreme balancing force in the Eurasian supercontinent. In this respect, “military diplomacy” and “nuclear diplomacy” will respectively aim at selling arms to rival states in order to ensure a status quo or a “zero-sum” basis of forces -whereas the U.S. has saturated ally-homelands with nuclear arsenals without their citizens’ consent and around exhausted, if not groundless, ‘Red scare’ narrative’. The Europeans are very much aware of what’s at stake in the Baltic area.
The second diplomatic effort will dedicate Russia to providing its global leadership in nuclear energy technology to non-traditional partners. We personally believe that this zero-sum strategy is a sheer madness echoing the British behavior towards India and Pakistan in the aftermath of independence. Nevertheless, you cannot decently lecture a country nor can you be part of any solution if you were ever part of the initial problem, or can you?
Is the world ready to shift from a G20 to a G200? In other words, can China find a way to somehow drag the U.S. Administration, the Anglo-American finance and related international institutions , the Pentagon’s war-machine etc. out of their great Unipolar world”‘s ambition? Why would this club for happy few western elites accept to join as happily into a bold humanitarian initiative (BRI) uniting the efforts and wealths of 5 continents aiming at creating more friendly and responsible approaches towards global causes as well as towards their own citizens? Because there is even more money [for western happy few] to make. To put it different, between making more money and hegemony, the U.S. is facing an existential dilemna for the excellence reason that at that point, America cannot do with or without China anymore. Once, Brzezinsky declared : “Hegemony is as old as mankind”. Once, Mao Zedong wrote : “Imperialism is the ultimate form of capitalism”. Xi Jinping’s “third way” which is characterized by a strong public sector, by cultural conservatism and by a smart economic liberalism focused on a humanitarian global project happens to be increasingly popular around the world.
©Mylene Doublet O’Kane, Oct 26 2017
Republishing of the articles is welcomed with reference to TCO.
The views of the authors do not necessarily coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.