(New Era World News)

AT THE END OF FRIDAY’S ARTICLE, “Are United States and Russia Headed for Cooperation Despite Neocon-Liberal Objections?“, it was concluded that, “The only player in the region with more to lose than Turkey, is Israel…who has benefited from the enormous pounding its enemies have given to each other over recent years – Israel benefits by continued conflict – it does not want peace between the US and Russia nor mutual-agreement over Syria and the Kurds. It remains to be seen what Israel will do in response to possible US-Russian cooperation in the battle over ISIS about to unfold in Raqqa (Syria); will they fight each other or cooperate? Chances are high that they will cooperate, but signs are being genratd that indicate that they might not.  Nonetheless, the question remains, “How will Israel respond to unexpected cooperation?”  If events that occurred earlier last week are any indication, the Israelis do not like what is unfolding, they have already violated Syrian airspace and fired missiles in Syria just a few days ago. In response, the Syrian military said that

“The Israeli strikes had targeted a military installation near Palymyra (in Syria).”

l

“The incident was highly unusual in that it also saw the Israeli military break its customary silence over raids in Syria to release a statement to admit that its aircraft had been targeted while operating there.”

l

“Overnight, March 17, IAF aircrafts [sic] targeted several targets in Syria”, ‘said the statement.'”

The United States might not be fighting against Syria at the moment but Israeli operations in Syria indicate that the Zionists are apparently engaged in operations against them as well as their ally, Iran who is legally transiting weapons across Syria to Hezbollah soldiers stationed on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, at least, that is the Israeli version of the story. Professor Eyal Zisser, a Syrian expert who teaches at Tel Aviv University in Israel, discussed an agreement made between Vladimir Putin and PM Netanyahu (June 7, 2015) in which the Russians supposedly gave their word that military equipment being transferred from Iran to Hezbollah is solely for purposes of waging war against ISIS; it would not therefore, be employed in any type of attack on Israel.

Thus, according to the Syrian accounts, Israel targeted Syrian military positions combating ISIS (not weapons being shipped to Hezbollah). Either way, Israel violated international law and the right of Syria to national sovereignty. Do weapons used against Syria transited through Turkey permit Syria to violate Turkish airspace and bomb Turkish infra-structure?  The airspace of sovereign nation is supposedly protected by international law.

“According to the set principles governing international law, a state has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the sky above its territory. Without permission, it is absolutely forbidden for foreign military planes to enter the territorial airspace of other states.”

Therefore, the Syrian Foreign Ministry drafted a complaint to the UN in which they stated

l“Syria calls on the UN Secretary General and the President of the UNSC to condemn this blatant Israeli aggression, to force Israel to stop supporting terrorism in Syria, to implement all UNSC resolutions on counter-terrorism, including resolution No. 2253, to withdraw from the whole occupied Syrian Golan to the line of June 4th, 1967, and to implement resolution No. 497 for 1981”

Israel has its own interpretation of events to justify its action: Iran is transferring weapons to Hezbollah to be used against israel. Here is a taste of Israeli justification from its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who stated that Israel would continue to act militantly to prevent transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah:

“Our policy is very consistent: when we identify attempts to transfer advanced weapons to Hezbollah, and we have the intelligence and operational feasibility – we work to prevent this.”

This is an open admission, what appears to be a braggadocio admission, followed by a dose of strained logic:

“That’s how it’s been and that’s how it will be, we have determination, and the proof is that we are acting, and everyone has to take this into account,” he added.

In other words, the morality of the act is to judged by the fact that Israel can get away with it, “the proof is we are acting” and “everyone has to take this into account.” This is not a reasonable or moral justification; it is nothing more than a “might makes right” argument, the rule of the jungle that governs animal interaction; it can only be hoped that this is not how Zionists view gentiles?

“Then they brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium. It was morning. And they (the Jews) themselves did not enter the praetorium, in order not to be defiled.”

This type if justification might have worked in the past, but more and more people are waking up to the dignity of the human person (all persons); this is a rational that people seeking peace and a two-state solution are growing tired of – being a citizen of Israel does not give anyone any type of hyper-human-status that empowers them to trample on the rights of others.

If this is really representative of Netanyahu’s logic, the Israeli PM is acting hypocritical. Israel would not permit foreign jets to invade their airspace and then annihilate targets without a media blitz fired around the globe amid a veritable storm of moral objections. The PM has just opened the doors to Syrian and Iranian jets flying into to Israel to obliterate what they perceive to be security threats to be used on targets in their own countries or that of their allies.

Apparently, Israel is not averse to violating international law to carry out its objectives, nor was Turkey who is now paying a price for its transgressions. Is Israel about to learn a similar lesson or will they influence the Trump administration to keep up war on Syria once ISIS is obliterated?

“Brig Gen Nitzan Nuriel, a former Director of Counter-Terrorism in the Israeli Prime Minister’s Bureau, said conflict with Hezbollah was inevitable as the group sought ever more advanced anti-aircraft missiles, heavy rockets and tactical weapons, but he believed Assad had seriously misread the situation.”

l

“Assad has not read the map correctly,” he said. “He believes it is only a question of weeks or months before he can declare a full victory and is looking to the next stage. I believe he is mistaken and that clashes in Syria will stay with us for the next three to six years.”

l

“Discussing Russia’s role in Syria, he added more controversially: “Russia got the messages it needs to receive from Israel.” That was, he said: “Israel will not allow anyone, including Russia to get in the way of implementing our military mission.”

This is a former Israeli Brigadier General’s perspective, but others are interpreting and reporting it differently. In fact, after the Israeli attack, the Russian government almost immediately summoned Gary Koren, the Israeli Ambassador, and requested an explanation – something they have not done following previous Israeli violations in Syria). Rather than smooth things over for the Israeli side, Avigdor Lieberman, Israeli Defense Minister, following the Netanyahu line, exacerbated them:

 “The next time the Syrians use their air defence systems against our planes we will destroy them without the slightest hesitation.”

As if to say that Israel has a right to annihilate targets in other countries, but these countries somehow act wrongly if they defend themselves as if the Zionists were some type of privleged people and the and the rest of the world is made up of outcasts. Israel has run into a Western nation that will not follow its script. Russia, apparently, will not allow itself be pushed around by the playground bully or be intimidated by empty chutzpah. Contrary to PM Netanyahu and Brig. Gen. Nitzan Nuriel, Dr. Bashar al-Jaafari, Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations, stated that

“Putin sent a clear message,” he said. “The fact is that the Israeli ambassador (to Russia) was summoned for a conversation… and was told categorically that this game is over.”

Jaafari also stated that “Syria will no longer sit by while Israel blatantly attacks its forces“; implying that the response will be greatly amplified if an Israeli attack occurs again.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, however, took a more pragmatic and realistic approach that moves beyond rhetoric to make decisions based upon actions.  After stating that Russia expects Israel to honor agreements made between Putin and Netanyahu during the latter’s state visit to Moscow earlier this month, he stated that Russia

“…will judge (Israel) not by their statements, but by their actions, to what extent our Israeli partners are sticking to these agreements.”

If these type of actions continue, a Russian response can be expected. In this regard, Syrian President Bashar Assad told visiting Russian legislators that Syria is depending on Russia to avert further Israeli attacks and to help Damascus avoid a “full-blown conflict with Tel Aviv”.  This does not appear to be something Syria desires and which it is trying to avoid, nor is it something desired by Russia.

At the June 7 meeting (discussed above) between Netanyahu and Putin, host Vladimir Putin concluded:

 “Russia and Israel can take pride in our high level of partnership, fruitful cooperation and far-reaching business contacts”

According to the Jerusalem Post,

“Since then, that partnership has continued to grow, but the looming crisis in Syria threatens to upset this dance.”

If the Israelis keep their word and discontinue bombing runs in Syria, the risk of confrontation with Russia will be minimized and most likely become non-existent (at least at this time). What the Jerusalem Post is referring to is the current situation in Syria where both US and Russian troops and their allies are all within a grenade’s distance of each other, each wanting to defeat ISIS, which is now isolated in its Syrian capital, Raqqa.  The offensive against this city is slated to begin in a few days; at this moment it is unclear how Russian and American forces will interact in this crucial campaign. Israel is a staunch US ally but has also entered into serious negotiations and agreements with Russia, will they risk their recent gains?

The entire scenario discussed above is contingent upon US and Russian cooperation or conflict in Syria. Will they cooperate to defeat ISIS at Raqqa and to craft a mutual-plan to support the Kurds in Northern Syria and Iraq?  If they fail to do so, if the United States or Russia have other plans in Syria, plans that would exacerbate rather than ameliorate American-Russian relations, the entire situation changes from a possible peace scenario to one of increased conflict, as will be discussed tomorrow.

(New Era World News)

DURING HIS PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN Donald Trump gave many signs indicating a possible rapprochement with Russia in order to forward the war against terrorism. Since his election, political observers have been watching carefully to assess movements relative to this implicit commitment.  As the data roles in, it is now possible to make some preliminary remarks based on actions taken by the new president during his first sixty days in office. Before doing so, it is helpful to review a New Era Forecast issued a month ago (February, 21).

FORECAST:

“The United States and Russia will continue down a path of rapprochement but not without significant interference, which can be expected from all ends of the political and social-cultural spectrum. Constant, well orchestrated, and confusing series of events can be expected as agents from both the left and right proceed to push confrontation with Russia to a boiling point. Nonetheless, in the long run, the shadow government will fail as it has consistently failed and been out maneuvered in its foreign policy initiatives for the past decade – we have no discernible reason to believe that this chain of events will cease unfolding. The shadow-government is being opposed by more than Mr. Trump.

l

The real question is what will Mr. Trump do? Will he continue down the road of his immediate predecessors, or be bold enough to set America on a new course?

Following that forecast, it was stated that if the new president continued with the foreign policy of the Bush and Obama administrations (as he appears to be doing), if he pursued the same path as his predecessors (a path favored by Neocon War Hawks and Liberal Globalists), American Foreign Policy would continue its downward slide and America would continue suffering one foreign policy embarrassment after another while earning the ire of other nations around the globe. President Obama was never able to disengage from war or to defeat ISIS; Trump however, has vowed to obliterate them, implicitly with Russian cooperation. It is this cooperation, above all else, that makes him an enemy of the Neocons (even though they are for the most part Republicans) and their Liberal allies deeply imbedded in ruling establishment.

The Trump Team is facing stiff opposition not only from an entrenched bureaucracy but from die hard members of the armed service committee and intelligence community who still view Russia through the lens of Soviet Communism or who are so committed to global liberalism that Russia (whom they realize is increasingly becoming a Christian nation-state, a purveyor of traditional family values, and an avowedly anti-liberal global power) must be stopped. Thus, if Trump plans to improve relations with Russia, he will be vehemently opposed by those who continue to insist upon the ideological export of liberal (economic and moral) American values, those who view themselves as patriots whose sacred duty is to confront the nefarious Russian Bear whose commitment to national sovereignty and Christianity is a threat to their global hegemony and the advancement of their Liberal Global Agenda.

l

l

Therefore, it was also stated,

“If Mr. Trump moves too quickly, he will not be able to withstand the tumultuous tsunami that is being gathered for a melancholy day of release; he must first cultivate relationships among international leaders (something he has done too little of) who have a very different view of America and American Foreign Policy than that being fed to him by Neocon war-hawks such as Sen. John McCain”, a man who keeps discrediting himself by accusing anyone opposed to his myopic interventionist military policy as “working for Vladimir Putin”, even if the others he assails are US Senators themselves.

l

l

Finally, it was also stated in February that

“It is not time for fisticuffs, so yes, Newera tends to believe that Mr. Trump has came out with a (foreign policy) rope a dope in Round One, at least partially so. If he is able to eventually pound ISIS into oblivion with Russian cooperation, he will build up a tidal wall of good-will and support composed of many international components that spell peace, a peace woven into a wall that will be able to withstand any Tsunami the Deep State can bellow in his direction.”

However, it was warned:

“If President Trump collapses before the bellowing winds and succumbs to the mounting global pressures of liberalism, if he fails to deliver on his campaign promises and follows the lead of Neocon war-hawks  like Sen. John McCain, New Era foresees an abject failure on the horizon and the ultimate collapse of American Foreign Policy and the waning of American influence.”

Unfortunately, Mr. Trump appears to be following the foreign policy of the Neocon and Liberal establishment. Consequently, the honeymoon given him by foreign nations is coming to an end. They have waited to see if he would deliver on his promises to treat all nations fairly, to cooperate with Russia to defeat terrorism and to start a new page in American history battling liberalism and seeking an Era of Peace. Apparently, he will do none of these things and continue the foreign policy of his predecessor built on the back of American military might.

World leaders have been looking on and refraining from imminent action while holding things in suspension waiting to see what Trump would do. They are no longer waiting; instead, global trends are reverting back to where they were before Trump took office, the international movement against liberalism has recommenced.  As forecast, the United States will either cooperate with this movement and be a purveyor of peace or it will suffer continued embarrassment. New Era holds to this forecast with the caveat that the United States might be pulled into the peace initiative in spite of its current bravado bolstered by an enormous military buildup. President Trump has not decreased but has already increased the military budget by $54 billion and is beefing up the American military presence around the globe to the ire of China, Russia, Turkey and many third world nations. The remainder of this article is concerned with US  foreign policy in the Middle East and how it is alienating Turkey and leading to a surprise tete a tete between US and Russian forces NOW within a grenades distance of each other on the battlefield of North-Central Syria where THEY ARE BOTH BATTLING ISIS-ISIL-ISLAMIC STATE AT THE SAME TIME AND IN THE SAME PLACE. This unexpected rubbing of shoulders in Syria offers a glimmer of hope that might signify the beginning of an ongoing cooperation. Don’t hold your breath however, Sen. John Mccain happens to be in the mix:

McCain “made a secret trip to a Kurdish-held region in northern Syria last weekend to speak with US military officials, rebel fighters, and leaders in the region.”

On Wednesday, (March 23) Julie Tarallo, a McCain spokesperson confirmed the mission, with the following TWEET

What is Happening in Syria and How it Might Affect Relationships with Russia and Turkey

President Obama alienated Turkey with his ongoing support of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), whom the Turks view as an ally of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), which operates in Turkey and is designated by Ankara as a terrorist organization. President Trump is headed down the same road. Foreign Policy Magazine notices the trend.  On March 21 they pointed out that warhawks and top US commanders regard the YPG as “the only viable option for ousting the Islamic State [Daesh].”  If the YPG represents the only viable solution, clearly Washington has ruled out cooperation with Russia, the most obvious solution.

Following its own initiative, an initiative ostensibly calculated to Make America Look Great Again, the Pentagon is deploying 1,000 troops to assist the Syrian Defense Forces (SDF) to battle the Deash in Raqqa. The SDF, is a Kurdish dominated militia established in 2015 and sponsored by the United States to help establish a Kurdish enclave in Northern Syria. The SDF is composed primarily of Kurds fighting under their own banner of People’s Protection Units (YPG). More specifically, it might be said that the YPG is a Kurdish dominated militia, which is fighting alongside the American backed SDF who are opposed to radical Islamic terrorists and also to the Russian-backed Syrian government of Bashar al Assad. Currently the SDF is planning to engage in an all-out assault on Raqqa, the capital and stronghold of ISIS-ISIL or the Islamic State. According to The Foreign Policy Group (FP)

“Even as the Trump administration weighs its options, the U.S. military is ramping up for the assault, drawing up plans to deploy up to 1,000 more American soldiers to Syria in support of the YPG and allied forces, known collectively as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which have advanced mere miles from the city (of Raqqa). Pentagon officials assess that the roughly 27,000 Kurds in the 50,000-strong SDF are the more effective, experienced fighters.

The New York Times (March 15) corroborated this report by FP:

“The U.S. military has drawn up early plans that would deploy up to 1,000 more troops into northern Syria in the coming weeks, expanding the American presence in the country ahead of the offensive on the Islamic State’s de facto capital of Raqqa.”

l

“The deployment…would potentially double the number of U.S. forces in Syria and increase the potential for direct U.S. combat involvement in a conflict that has been characterized by confusion and competing priorities among disparate forces.”

The plan to deploy 1,000 more troops is meant to bolster a previous deployment of United States Marines already ordered by President Trump. On March 9, the Guardian reported on the deployment of several hundred US Marines to Syria:

“A few hundred marines with heavy artillery have been deployed to Syria in preparation for the fight to oust Islamic State from its self-declared headquarters of Raqqa, a senior US official said on Wednesday.”

l

“The marines moving into Syria are positioning howitzers to be ready to help local Syrian forces, said the official, who was not authorised to discuss the deployment publicly.

There are already approximately 500 U.S. Special Operations forces in Syria operating alongside the SDF.  The are complemented by an additional 250 Army Rangers and 200 US Marines. The additional 1,000 U.S. troops will most likely be part of the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit that are part of a

“… flotilla of ships loaded with 2,200 Marines that is now steaming toward the region – and the U.S. Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, of which 2,500 recently arrived in Kuwait.”

Regarding this deployment, Turkish Prime Minister, Binali Yildirim cautioned US leaders:

“If  (Washington) insists on carrying on this operation with terror organizations (Kurds whom the Turks consider as terrorists and public enemy number one), our relations will be harmed — that is clear.”

Prime Minister Yilidrim’s statement is especially meaningful in the context of the Astana Meetings previously hosted by Russia, Iran and Turkey (in Astana, Kazakhstan), which have resulted in a  military coalition consisting of Turkey, Russia, and Iran, already operating in Syria where they are acting as a peacekeeping force.  Rather than joining the peace initiative, the US continues following its own foreign policy thereby driving Turkey further away from Washington.  In fact, this latest US maneuver, might also compromise US relationships with the United Nations, which is beneficiary of Russian efforts at Astana: The Russian, Turks and Iranians provided the military backbone which brought the contending parties to the UN sponsored meeting of diplomats in Geneva (Feb 2017).

The cooperating powers all agreed to the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of the Syrian nation, implying that they will uphold the right of Syria as a sovereign nation, a nation entitled to determine for itself who its leaders will be and who will be invited to fight alongside it against common enemies.

“The delegations of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey, in line with the Joint Statement of their Foreign Ministers made in Moscow, on December 20, 2016 and the UN Security Council resolution 2336…”reaffirm their commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, non-sectarian and democratic state.”

Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia emphasized this point:

The talks in Astana are “an important contribution to… a comprehensive political settlement in Syria which will continue in wider activities in Geneva.”

The prospect of ongoing US support of Kurds, esp. in Northern Syria, is seen in Ankara as a threat to Turkish security, a threat seemingly ignore by Donald Trump, a threat that drives Turkey deeper into a meaningful coalition with Russia.

To make the scenario extremely interesting, Russia is also backing the Kurds also to the ire of Turkey who is simultaneously fighting side by side with Russia as agreed to by the Astana Accords. The whole complicated situation is growing ever more complex. Turkey has been assisting Syrian Government forces (Assad’ forces backed by Russia) as they move toward Manbij a city held by US backed Kurds; therefore the US has deployed troops there to oppose a Turkish offensive. As reported by the New York Times :

“In recent weeks, U.S. Army Rangers have been sent to the city of Manbij west of Raqqa (in NW Syria) to deter Russian, Turkish and Syrian opposition forces all operating in the area, while a Marine artillery battery recently deployed near Raqqa (70 miles SW) has already come under fire, according to a defense official with direct knowledge of their operations.”

It is interesting that Syrian forces supported by the Syrian government engaged in warfare with Islamic terrorists in their own country are referred to as “opposition forces“. Opposition to whom, to the United States? If the Russian-Turkish backed Syrian army is fighting ISIS (Islamic State) and is called the “opposition‘, who is the United States fighting?

Turkey finds itself in a quandary, it is assisting Russia who is supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. At the same time, it is a NATO member and thus a US ally.  The United States has been backing rebel forces against Assad and supposedly, at the same time, also fighting Islamic terrorists such as ISIS and Daesh whom the Russians and Turks are also fighting. Turkey has indicated that it would commit ground troops to help US backed forces topple Raqqa but that eventuality is contingent upon US relinquishing its support of the Kurds (YPG) whom the Russians are also supporting.

Moreover, as a result of the Russian brokered Astana Accords, Syrian rebels, that is those that are Syrian and not Islamic terrorists imported from throughout the Middle East,  Syrian rebels who were opposed to Assad are now working with the Assad government to oust radical Islamic terrorists, which means if the terrorists are defeated there are virtually no indigenous forces of any considerable size left opposing the Syrian government; who will the United States support then? That is who will the United States support in Syria once ISIS or the Islamic State is defeated? Ostensibly, the Kurds will have the backing of both the United States and Russia, the preferred diplomatic position for both countries vis a vis Turkey. That is, it is better for the United States to have strained relations with Turkey over the Kurds if Russia also has strained relations with the Turks and for the same reason! Turkey will just have to get use to it – the US and Russia are apparently headed down a course leading to some type of cooperative agreement even if it is happening willy nilly.

The unexpected might be occurring, viz., Russia and the US are being pulled together by supporting the Kurds in Syria albeit at risk of exacerbating relations with Turkey.  Sarah El Deeb is one of the few to recognize the unexpected.  As reported in the Chicago Tribune:

“Ankara (that is, Turkey) has effectively unified Russia and the U.S. in the goal of limiting Turkish expansion in the north (North Syria where the Kurds live). Syrian experts say Ankara has lost influence to realize its aim of pushing the Kurdish forces back to the east of Manbij across the Euphrates. Moreover, Washington is pushing ahead with partnering with the Kurdish-led forces in the planned attack on Raqqa, despite Turkish opposition.”

According to Ragip Soylu a reporter for New Turkey, Turkey’s efforts to disrupt the US-Kurd alliance

“…has been tossed away as the Russian military and U.S. Special Forces moved last week in Syria’s Manbij to prevent Turkish-backed Syrian opposition forces from attacking the city,”

Russia has taken an unexpected stance on Manbij, instead of advancing on the city, THEY ARE WORKING TO PREVENT any further Syrian-Turkish advance deeply desired by the Turks. They are now involved in the mutual defeat of ISIS. At the moment they, the United States and Russia, are involved in planning an assault on ISIS in Raqqa and mutual support of the Kurds; the latter to the chagrin of the Turks

Complex as it is to discern, the future is perhaps beginning in Manbij and Raqqa, as U.S. Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, of the anti-ISIS coalition has said:

“All the forces acting in Syria have converged within hand-grenade range of one another. We encourage all forces to remain focused on the counter-ISIS fight and concentrate their efforts on defeating ISIS and not toward other objectives that may cause the coalition to divert energy and resources away from Raqqa.”

In other words, the US is not focused on toppling the Assad government (at least not now and possibly not again in the future). The mission is for once clear: defeat ISIS. This is something both the Americans and Russians can agree upon. The Russian are not looking for war between its allies, Turkey and Syria, versus the US forces in Manbij or Raqqa. Turkish and Syrian troops moving toward Manbij were halted due to a deal brokered by Russia that established a “buffer zone” between the Kurds and advancing Turk-Syrian forces. This zone is intended to protect the Kurds in Manbij and to keep Russian backed Syrian and Turkish troops out of conflict with the United States, esp. since they are all, as US General Townsend has stated: “within hand-grenade range of one another.”

Unfortunately, Turkey has not honored the zone:

“On Thursday, Syrian government media said Turkish shelling killed a number of its troops. Kurdish officials said Turkish advances continued even despite the buffer zone.”

Turkey, long a backer of terrorism throughout the Middle East, is now suffering a bout of what appears to be irremediable consternation. Since the United States and Russia are now face to face in Syria, since the United States and Russia are both supporting the Kurds in Syria, since the United States and Russia are both fighting ISIS in Syria simultaneously and at the same exact location, it will be difficult for Turkey to play anymore deceptive games designed to advance its own agenda and keep the two superpowers apart. The Turks however have at least three allies in this game, viz., the US Neocons, global liberals, and Israeli Zionists who will do anything to hinder real peace by keeping the two apart!

Nonetheless, will the United States begin to coordinate efforts with Russia to

(1) Protect Manbij, a city held by US backed Kurdish-led forces thereby increasing tensions with Turkey but lessening them with Russia (for the US that is)?

l
(2) Somehow pacify or restrain Turkey – something much easier if they cooperate – thereby bringing Turk dreams for a renewed Ottoman Empire or at least an Arab World under Turk domination to naught and as a result bring Turkey’s leaders to their senses?

l
(3) Defeat ISIS in a mutual effort to “bomb the shit out of them” as Trump promised during his campaign – Raqqa represents the possibility of fulfilling a campaign promise and of moving towards normalizing relations with Russia, although in a very unexpected way as explained above.

Or will the US act to salvage its relations with Turkey thereby lessening support for the Kurds and increasing tensions with Russia? Quite possibly Turkey will have to make a choice, that is, to seek a deeper alliance with the United States or Russia; either way, it will have to come to grips with the Kurds whom neither is likely to abandon. The only player in the region with more to lose than Turkey, is Israel (Saudi Arabia also stands to lose, but not as much as Israel) who has benefited from the enormous pounding its enemies have given to each other over these years – Israel benefits by continued conflict – it does not want peace between the US and Russia nor mutual-agreement over Syria and the Kurds. It remains to be seen what Israel will do in this situation; it has already violated Syrian airspace this past week.

“The Syrian military said the Israeli strikes had targeted a military installation near Palymyra (in Syria).”

l

“The incident was highly unusual in that it also saw the Israeli military break its customary silence over raids in Syria to release a statement to admit that its aircraft had been targeted while operating there.”

l

“Overnight, March 17, IAF aircrafts [sic] targeted several targets in Syria,” said the statement.”

The United States might not be fighting Syria at the moment but Israel is apparently trying to keep Syrian ally Iran from sending weapons to Hezbollah stationed on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights.  Israel is not averse to violating international law to carry out its objectives, nor was Turkey who is now paying a price for its transgressions. Is Israel about to learn a similar lesson or will they influence the Trump administration to keep up war on Syria once ISIS is obliterated?

“Brig Gen Nitzan Nuriel, a former director of counter-terrorism in the Israeli prime minister’s bureau, said conflict with Hezbollah was inevitable as the group sought ever more advanced anti-aircraft missiles, heavy rockets and tactical weapons, but he believed Assad had seriously misread the situation.”

l

“Assad has not read the map correctly,” he said. “He believes it is only a question of weeks or months before he can declare a full victory and is looking to the next stage. I believe he is mistaken and that clashes in Syria will stay with us for the next three to six years.”

l

“Discussing Russia’s role in Syria, he added more controversially: “Russia got the messages it needs to receive from Israel.” That was, he said: “Israel will not allow anyone, including Russia to get in the way of implementing our military mission.”

Although Israel favors continued conflict, as long as its enemies are killing each other and as long as Syria is potentially neutralized along with its ally Iran, although Israel favors such things, New Era is forecasting eventual peace – if the US and Russia actually cooperate to defeat ISIS – which means something will have to give in Israel, perhaps something significant.

.New Era World News

ON DECEMBER 30, PRIOR TO THE NEW YEAR, New Era reported that the Russian, Turkish, and Iranian foreign ministers gathered in Moscow to discuss the situation in Syria. As a result of the meeting, the three announced their willingness to facilitate future negotiations between Damascus and Syrian opposition groups.

As a result of the meeting, the Troika issued a document referred to by the New York Times as “The Moscow Declaration”. Among its eight articles, the “Declaration” states:

• Iran, Russia and Turkey express their readiness to facilitate and become the guarantors of the prospective agreement being negotiated between the Syrian Government and the opposition. They invited all other countries with the influence on the situation on the ground to do the same.

Consequently, On December 30 the Assad government and the main Syrian opposition groups agreed to a nationwide cease-fire. Turkey’s Anadolu News Agency, reported that Russia and Turkey agreed to act jointly in order to guarantee implementation of the ceasefire agreement; they have been actively monitoring violations since that date.

The Russians, Iranians, and Turks decided to act without the United States. Under President Obama, the United States neocons suffered a humiliating defeat, an international debacle far from their vision for a New American Century – The US was being taken out of the game and placed on the bench by the Russians.

“Russia (however) said the United States could join a fresh peace process once President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20” (Reuters, Dec 30, 2016).

Russian Secretary of State Sergey Lavrov stressed these sentiments in a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin:

“I would like to express the hope that as soon as the administration of Donald Trump takes office, they will also be able to join these efforts [to settle the Syrian crisis] so that we could jointly work in this direction”  (CNN News).

Russia has in fact extended an invitation to the Trump administration to send a representative to attend the talks in Astana.  Now that he is president, he will face opposition from neo-conservative and neo-liberal statesmen and from ranking officials in the Pentagon and intelligence community, men and women opposed to any cooperation with the Russians.

We will soon find out what the United States under President Trump is going to do – the Astana meeting began yesterday (January 23) in Kazakhstan as scheduled. It is the first time, since the conflict began six years ago, that high officials from the Syrian government have sat at a negotiating table with high officials representing the armed opposition to discuss cessation of a war that has claimed over 400,000 lives.

At the outset of the meeting (being held at the Rixos President Astana Hotel)  Iran, Turkey, and Russia welcomed the various delegates including representatives of the Syrian government and members of armed opposition groups opposed to the Syrian government.  The Syrian government is being represented by Bashar Jaafari (Syria’s Permanent Representative to the UN) who voiced extreme difficulty sitting down with countrymen who have helped ravage Syria supported by, an cooperating with, an overwhelming influx of foreign terrorists backed by an immense amount of foreign aid and assistance:

Delegates stressed the situation cannot be solved by military intervention.  Although the military is necessary to assure adherence to the cease-fire-peace initiative, the imbroglio must be revolved diplomatically, a process that will involve the United Nations.

“There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict…it can only be solved through a political process based on the implementation of the UN Security Council resolution 2254 in its entirety.

The cooperating powers all agreed to the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of the Syrian nation, implying that they will uphold the right of Syria as a sovereign nation, a nation entitled to determine for itself who its leaders will be and who will be invited to fight alongside it against common enemies.

“The delegations of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey, in line with the Joint Statement of their Foreign Ministers made in Moscow, on December 20, 2016 and the UN Security Council resolution 2336…”reaffirm their commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, non-sectarian and democratic state”

It appears as forecast in our earlier report that the Syrian High Negotiation Committee (HNC) the umbrella group for Syrian opposition groups has not been invited. The  “HNC is a Saudi-backed and formulated umbrella organization.” Given the fact that the HNC is headquartered in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, home of Sunni radicalism, of Shariah Law and Wahhabi and Salafist ultra-extremism led by Saud monarchs who rule their country with a tight fist, it seemed clear that they would not be invited. For centuries the Sauds have been locked in deadly combat with Shiite Iran and have been the prime supporters of jihad and terrorism in Syria.  It is hard to imagine a group supported by the Sauds involved in a peace process that will strengthen the hands of its enemies viz., Iran, Russia and Turkey. Moreover, the HNC, supported by Great Britain has insisted, that President Assad must be removed from office within six months of any transition. This is contrary to the Syrian initiated democratic process envisioned by the Russians and the Syrian people themselves who voted overwhelmingly in Assad’s favor in 2014.

Moreover, according to Aljazeera News

“The HNC would reject any agreement struck by Russia and the US if it largely differed from the HNC’s terms.”

To bolster military operations to secure the cease-fire (in spite of opposition groups such as the HNC and other terrorists not invited to Astana), it was agreed yesterday (Jan 23) that (1) Iran will cooperate militarily with Turkey and Russia to assure the ceasefire and (2) that Syria’s indigenous opposition forces will be separated from the various terrorist organizations operating within the country (al-Nusra-ISIL-Daesh), organizations supported by Saudi Arabia and represented by the HNC.  The terrorist groups will be subject to the combined wrath of Iran, Russia and Turkey who reiterated their “determination to fight jointly against… them.”

This in itself is an extremely significant development.  In the past Saudi Arabia has brokered deals with Turkey to keep Iran in check; now, it appears that Turkey is switching allegiance. By Turkey now combining with Iran, it is Saudi Arabia that is checked and potentially threatened.  The Sauds are further feeling the heat due to Russia’s combining its forces with both The Turks and the Persians (Iran). Implicitly, Saudi Arabia is being warned. If tensions do not cease; it is highly likely that Saudi Arabia will find bombs dropping on the Arabian Peninsula and Trump might not be there to intervene, esp. if he is working with the Russians to bring peace to the Middle East.

It appears that the Astana meeting is intended to foster peace between the Assad government and Syrian opposition, that is with opposition from Syrian citizens (not imported terrorists) who have issues with the government. Once these issues are resolved, the UN can take up negotiations with the terrorists who are unruly even at a meeting.  In all likelihood, Syria is being united, internal grievances mollified and divisions healed before the Russians, Turks and Iranians begin pounding the terrorists into oblivion – as Trump has stated “I would bomb the shit out of ISIS”.

jyt

https://youtu.be/KK79N5zOmZQ

ghg

Before this can happen, bombing the “shit” out of ISIS, Assad wants to unify his country and mitigate any grievances to assure the full support of his countrymen in the war that is about to be unleashed on the terrorists unless the UN can somehow avoid the coming conflict, a conflict that will presumably involve the US aligning with the Russians, Turks, Iranians and Syrians against ISIL-Deash-al Nusra et al.

Tuesday’s meeting concluded with the three guarantors issuing a join-statement supporting the upcoming UN Geneva talks and the participation of Syrian opposition forces (not necessarily the terrorists) within them.

hjh
Meeting Concluded but Not Over

The January 23 meeting was open to the press.  Today, Jan 24, participants are meeting en banc behind closed doors to engage in further discussions between the Syrian government and opposition forces. Apparently, President Trump has been contacted and responded positively; it is reported that the United States has a representative there. According to Sputnik:

“Damascus delegation is set to speak first, followed by the armed opposition, Russia, Iran, Turkey, the United States and the United Nations.

Kairat Abdrakhmanov,  Foreign Minister of host Kazakastan, is optimistic:

“I am confident that the meeting in Astana will provide the necessary conditions allowing to find the acceptable solution of Syrian crisis for all the interested parties in the framework of Geneva process under the auspices of the UN and will be a significant step forward to peace and stability in Syria. I wish you successful and fruitful negations….Kazakhstan believes that the only correct way to resolve the situation in Syria should be negotiations based on mutual trust and understanding.”

Abdrakhmanov also stressed his wishes for a successful start that will lead to a breakthrough opening the way to the diplomatic side of things to occur in Geneva under UN auspices on February 8, 2017.

“We are providing you with the platform and the conditions to start negotiations… The next few days are very important,” the delegates he said “should use this opportunity to ensure a real breakthrough.”

The Astana round involves representatives of the armed opposition whereas the Geneva round will be a political process involving diplomats.  The Astana round is primarily a military round involving maintenance of the ceasefire that will prepare the way for the Geneva Round in February.  Highly significant is the role Russia s playing in cooperation with the UN. It is Russian military might in cooperation with Iran and Turkey that the UN is relying on to bring the contending parties to Geneva to engage in higher diplomatic talks.  In the past, meetings were attempted in Geneva but armed opposition groups refused to participate. Astana therefore represents a breakthrough, and if the talks proceed well (along with a successful ceasefire) there is hope for significant progress in Geneva.

As a result the Astana talks will focus primarily on military issues. Strategies and agreements intended to enhance the volatile ceasefire are expected to be the main issue on the agenda. These agreements, if reached, will pave the way for a political settlement of the Syrian crisis in Geneva. Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia emphasized this point:

The talks in Astana are “an important contribution to… a comprehensive political settlement in Syria which will continue in wider activities in Geneva in early February.”

However, if neocon war hawks respond like the liberal robotons taking to the streets in various US cities, if the war hawks are as un-accepting of Trump’s Russian initiatives or of Russia brokering a peace treaty while the US plays second fiddle, disruption or attempted disruption of the new administration can be expected. If the neocon response is anything like the liberal response, further unrest can be expected in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East. The fact that ISIL and Jadhat Fatah al Sham (al Nusra Front), who maintain control of large swathes of Syria’s oil fields, are not at the Astana meeting is indicative of a latent backlash waiting for Trump – these are forces who were, and have been, supported by neocons during the Obama administration. If Trump is unable to adroitly handle domestic opposition against Russia and Assad, opposition rising from war-hawks in his own party and from liberals on the left who will use the opportunity (who will do anything to put the new president in a quagmire) to disrupt his administration, the situation will grow worse, not better.

However, do not count the rising American majority out, the men and women who rose to put Trump in the White House. If the liberal neocon cohort has not learned its lesson, the same people who voted for Trump will themselves soon take to the streets in unprecedented numbers in support of their new president and of America’s new peace initiatives.  They are tired of war-mongering, of being lied to, of unpunished criminal acts, of disruption and constant belly-aching from hypocritical and spoiled extreme liberal leftists – they have simply had enough.  If things continue as usual, “same old-same old”, it can be expected that they will soon be heard from in a rising crescendo of support for peace and cooperation with Russia and other coopering nations throughout the world as the promised Era of Peace dawns upon humanity.

President Trump and the United States have an opportunity to work with Russia and the global community toward world peace. But to be successful they must resign themselves to the reality that the neocon-neoliberal vision for a new American Century must be modified.  The age of liberal global hegemony is coming to an end.  Increasingly, the nations of the world are opting for national sovereignty and a restoration of traditional family values as the Era of Peace promised at Fatima continues to dawn upon the nations.

The United States can either adjust and cooperate or continue suffering one foreign policy embarrassment after another. It is either cooperate for peace or, as concluded in the previous article, a continued fall into irrelevance, something the Americans are unaccustomed too. If this happens, due to lack of cooperation with Russia et al, the liberals and their neocon allies who help make it a reality will have something real to cry about.

 

ALTHOUGH THE US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION scandal allegedly involving Russian hacking has resulted in the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats and the closure of two Russian diplomatic compounds in New York and Maryland, the bigger news story is the Middle East peace process being conducted by Russia, Turkey, and Iran without US involvement.

Just before the Christmas break, on December 20, the Russian,Turkish, and Iranian foreign ministers gathered in Moscow to discuss the situation in Syria. As a result of the meeting, the three announced their willingness to facilitate future negotiations between Damascus and Syrian opposition groups.

According to the New York Times

“Russia, Iran and Turkey met in Moscow on Tuesday to work toward a political accord to end Syria’s nearly six-year war, leaving the United States on the sidelines..”

 

“Secretary of State John Kerry was not invited. Nor was the United Nations consulted.”

 

“With pro-government forces having made critical gains on the ground, the new alignment and the absence of any Western powers at the table all but guarantee that President Bashar al-Assad will continue to rule Syria under any resulting agreement, despite President Obama’s declaration more than five years ago that Mr. Assad had lost legitimacy and had to be removed.”

 

“Andrew J. Tabler, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who studies Syria stated, “When the Turks, the Iranians and the Russians all agree on a process without the U.S. being in the room, you realize there is a problem for us.”

As a result of the meeting, the three nations issued a document referred to by the New York Times as “The Moscow Declaration”.  Among its eight articles, the “Declaration” adumbrates:

1. Iran, Russia and Turkey respect the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as multi-ethnic, multi-religious, non-sectarian, democratic and secular state.

2. There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. The United Nations is essential in the efforts to resolve this crisis in accordance with UNSC resolution 2254.

3. The importance of expanding ceasefire, unhindered humanitarian assistance and free movement of civilians throughout the country.

5. Iran, Russia and Turkey express their readiness to facilitate and become the guarantors of the prospective agreement, being negotiated, between the Syrian Government and the opposition. They invited all other countries with the influence on the situation on the ground to do the same.

7. The Ministers take note of the kind offer of the President of Kazakhstan to host relevant meetings in Astana.

DF

RESULTS OF THE MOSCOW DECLARATION

The Moscow Declaration was promulgated on December 20; last night at midnight (December 29-30) the Assad government and the main Syrian opposition groups agreed to a nationwide cease-fire. Turkey’s Anadolu News Agency, reports that Russia and Turkey will jointly guarantee implementation of the ceasefire agreement.

Although other cease fire agreements brokered by the UN have been unsuccessful, Turkey and Russia previously negotiated a cease fire, in the first half of December 2016, that led to the successful evacuation of civilians and rebel fighters from the city of Aleppo. One rebel commander told Reuters: “This time I have confidence in its seriousness. There is new international input” (Turkey and Iran working with Russia)

Thus, this morning,Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim told the press:

“I hope this cease-fire will turn into a sustainable peace that would prevent further bloodshed and the killing of civilians, innocents and children.”

The deal involves on one side the Syrian government armed forces, their allies and the Russian Federation. The other side includes rebel factions operating under the umbrella of the The High Negotiations Committee (HNC), which represents Syria’s opposition groups and the so-called Free Syrian Army terrorists backed by the United States intended to topple the Assad regime; they are now committed to pursuing negotiations in Astana.  According to “World Affairs Journal“

“The High Negotiations Committee (HNC), regarded by the UN as Syria’s main opposition body, confirmed the deal, which excludes jihadist groups. If the truce holds, peace talks will be held in Kazakhstan within a month.”

President Putin made it known that the agreement revolves around three major principles:

1. Ceasefire among all parties involved in the conflict
2. Measures to oversee the truce
3. An agreement to initiate peace talks

Although of major importance, Putin referred to the deal as “fragile”. According to the BBC, he also indicated that Russia would reduce its military presence in Syria, but  would “continue fighting international terrorism and supporting the Syrian government”.

Negotiations are expected to begin in January at Astana, the capital of  Kazakhstan.

bg

The Cease-Fire Includes Comprehensive Peace Talks in Kazakhstan’s Capital Astana

Russia, Iran and Turkey were instrumental in freeing Aleppo and are now poised to take the next step. During the Moscow meeting, December 19, 2016, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the President of Turkey, agreed to call the major parties involved in Syrian combat to meet in Astana, Kazakhstan to begin a peace initiative. Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of Kazakhstan, supports the process and the opportunity to host the participants. Interestingly, the UN has announced that it too will conduct negotiations involving the Syrian government and opposition groups scheduled for February 8 in Geneva, Switzerland.

Reuters notes that, at the Astana meeting,

“The Syrian government will be negotiating from a strong position after its army and their allies, including Shi’ite militias supported by Iran, along with Russian air power, routed rebels in their last major urban stronghold of Aleppo this month.”

“Moscow’s air campaign since September last year has turned the civil war in Assad’s favour, and the last rebels left Aleppo for areas that are still under rebel control to the west of the city, including the province of Idlib.”

All sides are agreed that the terrorist groups such as ISIL/ISIS, Al Nusra and Daesh must be defeated.  The defeat of the terrorists has taken primary position. Even the Turks who had previously insisted that Assad must be removed have now shifted their emphasis to the Syrian Kurds living on the Syrian-Turkish border whom they consider to be a threat to the stability of Turkey. With every day that passes, it seems more certain that Assad will remain in power to be removed only by a free democratic election that represents the will of the Syrian people, something the United States as opposed but that Russia has insisted upon all along – the United States wants Assad gone.  The last time such an election was held in 2014, Assad won 88.7% of the vote.

https://youtu.be/Yetgi-8k0NQ

 

Since that time, and the fall of Aleppo, things have changed considerably.  Turkey watching Russia’s success and angered by the United States backing of the Kurds, which Ankara views as an existential threat, has continually distanced itself from NATO and the US; Turkey is now showing sure signs of a shift toward the Russian-Iranian-Syrian-Iraqi camp.

At the meeting in which Russia, Iran and Turkey agreed to “the Moscow Declaration,” the United States was not consulted, nor was the UN envoy to Syria invited.

The United States is suffering an embarrassment and must save face vis a vis the Russians somehow. The fact is, the US is playing its foreign policy cards all wrong.  As the Russian Insider reports. “So much so that Assad whom the empire had marked for the trash bin in 2011 now looks certain to survive and defeat the jihad against the Syrian Baath government….Ankara has gone from working with the US and Saudia Arabia and Qatar to topple the Syrian government to talking with Iran and Russia how to find a political solution that ends the conflict.”

Turkey is quite simply refusing to serve as a US-UN puppet any longer.  Ankara views the fight against Kurdish militants as a more important objective than the UN-US objective aimed at the removal of Assad. Thus, according to Aaron Stein of the Atlantic Council:

“This is Turkey bending to Russia….This is putting a fine point on Turkey’s policy of ‘Assad must go’ no longer being the policy.”

Consequently, the clear forecast  includes the centrality of the Kurds and Kurdistan in the peace talks.  Alluding to the Kurds (but also including ISIS/ISIL-Daesh), Turkey’s Prime Minister stated:

“We will hunt them everywhere. We will follow them wherever they flee. This is no joke. We will continue our work for the peace and safety of our nation.”

aa

Participation of Kurds in Astana Process

The Kurdish problem cannot be comprehended unless it is realized that the Kurds are represented by several political-military groups. Kurds living in Turkey comprise roughly 22% of the Turkish population. They are represented by the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK), a party that Turkey considers a terrorist organization, as does NATO, the EU and the United States. The PKK, although existing in Turkey, hopes to establish an independent state known as Kurdistan.

There are other Kurds living in Iraq and Syria.  Syrian Kurds are represented by the “Democratic Union Party” (PYD). The PYD was established in 2003 as a major opposition party to the Syrian government located in Northern Syria in an area contiguous with Turkey, thus an additional potential challenge for Turkey as well. In 2012 the PYD (in Syria) formed local militias or People’s Protection Units (YPG) to help Kurds cooperate for their own security and to assist the United States in its fight against ISIS.  The US armed the YPG through a broader group known as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).  The SDF includes Kurdish militia in Northern Syria – Syrian Kurdish militia (YPG) are being armed with American weapons. When the SDF was founded in 2015, The Economist described it  as “essentially a subsidiary of the Kurdish YPG. Likewise CNN reports that

“The United States has denied supplying the YPG with weapons but says it provides tactical support to the Syrian Democratic Forces, the umbrella group in which the YPG is the main component.”

Thus, Turkey is weary about any affiliations between the PKK (in Turkey) and the PYD (in Syria), especially since the PYD has established armed security units (YPG) that Ankara believes are armed, dangerous, and affiliated with the PKK in Turkey.

Not only are foreign relations with Turkey involving Kurds on the Turkish border a problem for the future, the future Syrian government will have to be extra creative when handling the indigenous Kurds who have exercised a degree of autonomy during the Syrian conflict unknown previously. In 2012 Assad essentially relinquished control of Northeast Syria to the Kurds. This area is home to the bulk of the country’s oil reserves (also across the border of Iraq’s oil reserves) and some of its prime agricultural lands.  As much as Syria, Iraq and Turkey might want to see them go away, the Kurds are certainly a player in Syria’s future as well as the futures of Iraq and Turkey.

To complicate the situation, another group of Kurdish militants known as the Peshmerga exist in Northern, Iraq also close to Turkey and Syria. Since the Peshmerga aided the US in its war with Iraq, they have long been considered a US ally.

Thus, Bilal Wahab Soref Fellow at The Washington Institute notes the strong toes between the US and Iraqi Kurds:

“As reliable on-the-ground partners to the United States, the Kurdish forces in Syria, like their brethren in Iraq, have gained a reputation as fierce fighters and a bulwark against the Islamic State (also called ISIS, ISIL, or Daesh). Indeed, the Kurdish fighters have often been portrayed as foot soldiers for the United States in Syria. In that regard, not only did the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and Peshmerga defend the Kurdish population, they are also slated to be instrumental in the U.S. led coalition efforts.”

Clearly, the participation of Syrian Kurds (who have not yet been invited to participate in the Geneva negotiations) in the Astana Process is a crucial issue. Turkey remains adamantly opposed to Kurdish participation, while Russia continues to insist that the Kurds be included. Since the date of the meeting and list of participants has not yet been concluded, there is still time to include the Kurds.  It is hard to imagine a peace process in which a major party to the conflict such as the Kurds (a party with a long standing cultural tradition and historical roots in Northern Syria, Iraq, and Southern Turkey) is excluded.

Nonetheless, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu announced today that:

“The Syria’s Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) will not take part in the talks on Syrian settlement in Astana. As for its armed wing, the YPG, if they lay down arms and support the territorial integrity of Syria instead of forming a terrorist canton, they will be included in the country’s government. If they do not refuse terrorism… we will continue our struggle against them.”

Ankara simply desires a Turkey friendly region in Northern Syria. If Kurdish militants lay down their arms, as far as Turkey is concerned, they will be admitted to the negotiation table in Astana.

The other party whose presence at Astana is as yet undecided is the previously mentioned Syrian High Negotiation Committee (HNC) the umbrella group for Syrian opposition groups. What the World Journal failed to mention above is that HNC is a Saudi-backed and formulated umbrella organization.

The HNC has not been invited and it is highly unlikely, in spite of their self-proclaimed importance, that they will be invited.  The HNC was formed late in 2015; it has its headquarters in Riyadh home of Sunni radicalism, of Shariah Law and Wahhabi and Salafist ultra-extremism. The Saud monarchs rule their country with a tight fist. For centuries they have been locked in deadly combat with Shiite Iran and have been the prime supporters of jihad and terrorism in Syria.  It is hard to imagine a group supported by the Sauds involved in a peace process that will strengthen the hands of its enemies viz., Iran, Russia and Turkey. Moreover, the HNC plan for transition, drafted in 2016 and welcomed by the government of Great Britain, insist that President Assad must be removed from office within six months of any transition. This is contrary to the Syrian initiated democratic process envisioned by the Russians and the Syrian people themselves who voted overwhelmingly in Assad’s favor in 2014.

Moeover, according to Aljazeera News

“Chief opposition negotiator Riyad Hijab… said the HNC would reject any agreement struck by Russia and the US if it largely differed from the HNC’s terms.”

It is highly unlikely that a newly formed coalition of rebels headquartered in an enemy state will dictate terms to Russia, Iran and Turkey, esp. since their combined forces have been victorious thus far deep into the war.

The British, moreover, are working with leaders of the HNC to promote a liberal democracy (a type of democracy that is withering around the globe – not democracy per-se, but “liberal democracy”) in Syria to end what they call the  “tyranny of the Assad regime.”  According to the UK Government:

“The UK has and remains at the forefront of international efforts to address the Syria crisis. The UK’s membership of the UN Security Council and International Syria Support Group is used to call for adherence to the cessation of hostilities and full humanitarian access.”

The UK wants to help build a democracy in Syria, but Syrians do not want the UK; they would rather decide the future for themselves.

What makes the participation of HNC even more remote is the involvement of Turkey whom the Sauds have historically depended upon to balance power vis a vis Iran.  That scenario is now in jeopardy – a peace process brokered by Iran united to Russia and Turkey is anathema to the Sauds. Thus, it is extremely unlikely that either the HNC or the Sauds will participate or be offered a voice and certainly not a vote (if there is any vote) in Astana.

It appears that the Turks have already compromised with Russia and Syria on Assad.  Consequently, they have some wiggle room to resist Russia on the Kurdish question (see note 2 below). Turkey also faces an imbroglio with Iran. Ankara continues to insists that Hezbollah (an Iranian backed Lebanese shia militia that has supported Assad) vacate Syria. Turkey will probably get its way on this issue as well, as long as all three agree that Assad remains in power. Of the four issues: Assad,  Hezbollah,  HNC, and the Kurds, the latter seems the most difficult to resolve.

Nonetheless, the issue will be resolved by the Russians, Iranians and Turks. Under President Obama, the United States neocons are suffering a humiliating defeat, an international debacle far from their vision for a New American Century – The US is being taken out of the game and being placed on the bench by the Russians.  Putin is now calling the shots (see note 1 below).

“Russia has said the United States could join a fresh peace process once President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20. It also wants Egypt to join, together with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iraq, Jordan and the United Nations” (Reuters, Dec 30, 2016).

Russian Secretary of State Sergey Lavrov stressed these sentiments in a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin:

“I would like to express the hope that as soon as the administration of Donald Trump takes office, they will also be able to join these efforts [to settle the Syrian crisis] so that we could jointly work in this direction”  (CNN News).

President-Elect Trump has indicated his willingness to cooperate more closely with Russia.  He will face opposition from neo-conservative and neo-liberal statesmen and from ranking officials in the Pentagon and intelligence community.  Nonetheless, he has an opportunity to work with Russia and the global community toward world peace.  But to be successful he must resign himself to the reality that the vision for a liberal new American Century must be modified.  The age of liberal global hegemony is coming to an end.  Increasingly, the nations of the world are opting for national sovereignty and a restoration of traditional family values as the Era of Peace promised at Fatima continues to dawn upon the nations.

The United States can either adjust and cooperate or continue suffering one foreign policy embarrassment after another.

______________________
NOTE

1. New Era does not foresee Russia remaining in this position, but for the moment it is increasing its global prestige until complimented and surpassed by a resurgent Europe. 
2. The YPG, and its political counterpart, the Democratic Union Party (PYD), have also forged increasingly close relations with Russia, recently symbolised by the formal opening of a PYD representative office in Moscow

DURING CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY several significant events occurred that manifest the continued demise of global liberalism as the world continues to move toward an “Era of Peace” promised by the Mother of God at Fatima.

Following the demise of the Soviet Union, Republican think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute, crafted the “Project for the New American Century” (PNAC) to disseminate America’s economic-political-social agenda around the globe by means of war and “nation building” as if a victory over the Soviet Union signaled the moment for American hegemony, even if it was unwanted by many third world countries in Africa and Asia and newly developing nations in Eastern Europe. Nonetheless, according to the “neo-cons” (neoconservatives) , the so-called “developing nations” should thank America for interfering in their domestic affairs. They are so backwards and lost in darkness and ignorance that they must be “forced to be free through a program of “nation building” backed by the state as championed by Jean Jacques Rousseau, one of the classical patriarchs of modern liberal democracy. Liberal democracy in the name of “freedom”  has generated a hedonistic and materialistic world view foisted upon the nations as part of American foreign policy.

Cardinal Glemp, Primate of Poland during the Solidarity Era, foresaw and lamented the spread of Western Liberalism, what he referred to as “materialism.”

“We (Poland and the Catholic Church) have withstood the onslaught of ‘atheistic materialism‘, Communism is dead. However, I am not so sure that we can withstand the onslaught of ‘hedonistic materialism‘ (coming from the West).”

Since a materialistic world view has been promoted by American foreign policy, it should be no surprise that PNAC has morphed into the American Foreign Policy Initiative (ACPI). ACPI focuses on human rights, a robust military equipped to meet global challenges and global economic outreach.  Like PNAC, ACPI is committed to a belief in American exceptionalism and the need for American intervention around the globe.  Thus, according to the ACPI Mission Statement:

“In this new era, the consequences of failure and the risks of retreat would be even greater than before. The challenges we face require 21st century strategies and tactics based on a renewed commitment to American leadership. The United States remains the world’s indispensable nation — indispensable to international peace, security, and stability, and indispensable to safe-guarding and advancing the ideals and principles we hold dear.”

Neocon heavyweights William Kristol and Robert Kagan, who were both project directors of the PNAC, co-founded ACPI in 2009. Since then, American Foreign Policy has included such aberrations as usury, abortion, artificial birth control, homosexuality, gender confusion, and excessive tolerance resulting in a sin filled anti-Christian global culture funded by American dollars disguised as “foreign aid” intended to promote, peace, prosperity and, of course, freedom.

Ironically, none of these objectives (peace, prosperity, freedom-authentic freedom) have been achieved; the nations do not co-exist in peace, prosperity has not been forthcoming in those nations that are recipients of foreign aid, and freedom has been compromised by political interference and a whole host of addictions: chemical addiction, sex addiction, media addiction, food addiction, tobacco and alcohol addiction and a culture of dependency, which enervate and enfeeble human strength and ability to resist temptations leading to an explosion of erotic and irascible behavior. Although liberals set freedom on a granite pedestal to be honored as a goddess, few people can attain freedom in a culture wherein sin, death, and violence pervasively dominate the air waves in which her torch shines.

“Jesus answered them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin (not free)” (John 8:34).

Nor can peace be attained as long as neo-con war hawks (aided by their neo-liberal allies) continue their push for an “American Century”, a period of American global hegemony accompanied by the three pillars of economic, political, and social-cultural liberalism. Peace cannot be obtained in a world without God, in a world dominated by usury that works to the benefit of a few, in a world in which military power is used to disseminate materialism and hedonism upon weaker nations as if the world were an UNREGULATED jungle in which the will of the stronger pervades to the detriment of the weaker.

GF

SO, WHAT HAPPENED OVER THE CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY THAT SPELLS THE END OF LIBERAL HEGEMONY?

1. Weapons made in the United States found in Aleppo
2. Boko Haram defeated in Nigeria
3. Russia, Turkey and Iran Brokering Peace, US Excluded
4. Israeli Expansion Opposed in UN

k

I Weapons Made in the United States Found in Aleppo

Neo-con globalists must have swallowed hard when, over the Christmas holiday, the Syrian army liberated Aleppo and were greeted not by fear and anxiety as the Western press would have its readers believe, but with thunderous applause from Syrian citizens accompanied by joyous celebration, which broke out in the streets of Aleppo, a city newly liberated from American backed terrorists euphemistically referred to in the press as “moderates”  and “freedom fighters”.  No one has been able to satisfactorily define just what in fact a “moderate terrorist” is, terrorists equipped by the United States and its allies to free Syria from its supposed despotic leader Bashar al Assad (see “Syrian Army Routes Terrorists Liberates Aleppo Can they Defeat Liberal Propaganda“)

Ironically, it is Assad who is freeing Syrians from foreign despotism; the Western backed terrorists were not armed and paid to free Syria, but to enslave it (see video below).

“It is a fact that since 2012, those so-called ‘moderate’ rebels in Syria had been absorbed into al-Qaeda groups or pledged allegiance to ISIS. For the past year, the moderates have been gone. So when the media only calls these groups freedom fighters, [while] these fighters have pledged themselves to al-Qaeda, and to ISIS, make no mistake – they are not looking to make Syria free. They are looking to enslave it, as they have so many other places” (see video).

In this regard, Ben Swann (WGCL-TV Atlanta) took mainstream media to task for its poor coverage of the Aleppo event. Swann demonstrated that the so-called ‘moderate rebels’ backed by the US are actually supporting the terrorists.

Swan reports that the CIA regularly delivered weapons to the Syrian rebels.” The Washington Post confirmed these deliveries, and also implicated the US State Department. The Post reported that the  “flow of material” marked “a major escalation of the US role in Syria’s civil war.” Swann states that through 2016, “weapons and funding from the West continued. In September of this year, 2016, the US delivered three thousand tons of weapons and ammo to fighters in Syria, including rocket launchers and anti-tank guided weapons systems.”

Anchor Ben Swann – WGCL-TV Atlanta

YHY

Aleppo Falls American Cache Located and Confiscated

https://youtu.be/hOt6ZORx2Ic

klkl

II Boko Haram was Surprisingly Defeated by the Nigerian Army Announced Christmas Eve

Since 2009, Nigeria, one of the largest Christian countries in Africa, has been facing an insurrection from Boko Haram (BH), the radical Islamic State affiliate in Nigeria.  BH was founded in 2002 by a Muslim clergyman; translated BH roughly means “western culture is a sin”. Nigeria is a country steeped in traditional family values rooted in the natural law manifest in Christianity and Islam. Southern Nigeria is predominately Christian, while the North remains predominately Muslim and a breeding ground for radical Islam. Nonetheless, BH has been a nemesis to both Christian and Muslim cultures, which have consistently lost ground to the terrorists. In 2009 the extremely radical Abubakr took over the group and violence escalated.

Since 2009, BH has killed approximately 20,000 people and driven 2.3 million into exile. The United Nations confirmed the humanitarian crisis in Nigeria, reporting that up to “14 million people [are] in need of humanitarian assistance.” In 2014 hundreds of school girls were abducted from a government secondary boarding school in Chibok, Northeast Nigeria.

Prior to the rise of BH, Muslims and Christians lived alongside each other (as in Syria, Russia, Iraq etc).  Today, they fight alongside each other as members of the Nigerian army battling BH together.

Nigerian Catholic Bishop Emanuel Badejo confirms this coexistence prior to the rise of BH:

“I’m from the West of Nigeria, where the Yoruba culture is very strong. In the Yoruba culture there are many Muslims. In my particular area we are a minority of Christians living with a majority of Muslims, but we do wonderfully well together. In my diocese—and I think this is something that hasn’t gotten into the public media enough—I have 17 schools. Seventy percent of the students in my schools are Muslim children and even some of them — not that many, but quite a number — opt to convert to Christianity and their parents don’t have a problem with that. I am telling you the truth.”

Bishop Badejo has informed the world that BH is being used by the United States to advance the liberal agenda in Nigeria. According to the bishop, Nigeria is under the liberal threat of  “ideological colonization” that is seeking to destroy the family.

“It’s so bad, he says, that the “United States has made clear it will not help Nigeria fight the Boko Haram terror group unless the country modify its laws regarding homosexuality, family planning and birth-control.”

So BH is being being used as a battering ram to martyr Nigeria in the name of liberalism. Thus, when Nigerian President, Muhammadu Buhari, made the Christmas Eve announcement that Boko Haram had been defeated, the world’s liberal elite took notice. The president announced:

 

NJKB

OVER FOUR YEARS AGO TERRORISTS FORCES backed by Saudi dollars and Western military assistance overran the free city of Aleppo and turned it into a prison camp for previously free Syrian citizens. Four years later, on December 12, 2016, the Syrian Army backed by Russian air assistance officially declared victory over the terrorists in the battle to free Aleppo.

Despite the fact that Syria is a sovereign nation, a sovereign nation having the right to fight terrorists who are threatening its existence, the western press is painting the fall of Allepo and the defeat of terrorists as a bad thing.  Not only is it a bad thing, Assad is, we are told, a butcher hated by his people.

Senator John MaCain, the neo-con war hawk,  wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

“Assad is perpetuating the wanton slaughter of innocent Syrians.”

“When Mr. Assad, Mr. Putin and their allies have slaughtered all that stand in their way, they will proclaim peace in the bloody sands of the Syrian desert.”

If you happen to follow the Wall Street Journal links, please browse the comments; basically even conservative readers of the Journal have had enough of this bravado and verbiage.

Similarly, in a New York Times article entitled: “Assad the Butcher” it is stated:

“With every new atrocity, calls for military action grow…The best hope of avoiding that is for.. Russia, China and Iran to stop enabling Mr. Assad’s savagery.”

Like wise, the New Yorker opines:

“The commission’s work (Commission established by UN to investigate human-rights abuses) recently culminated in a four-hundred-page legal brief that links the systematic torture and murder of tens of thousands of Syrians to a written policy approved by President Bashar al-Assad, coördinated among his security-intelligence agencies, and implemented by regime operatives, who reported the successes of their campaign to their superiors in Damascus.”

Here is another perspective on the news given by a Canadian Journalist, Eva Bartlett, which seems to make more sense:

yi

https://youtu.be/TjHniRRgOao

kukj

As reported previously, the McCain war-hawk line of approach does not make much sense and can be dismissed as war-propaganda.

“If there was a civil war in Syria, a civil war supported and backed by the United States and a coalition of over fifty nations including the citizens and dissatisfied elements of the Syrian armed forces in addition to an overwhelmingly large cadre of rebels imported from throughout the Middle East, all against Assad, Assad should have been overthrown a long time ago. Yet, after five years he is still president and growing stronger. Given more than ample opportunity and plenty of time, the Syrian people have not risen up in revolt against their president. Instead, they are being held captive by terrorists supported by the United States, and Assad is increasingly seen by the Syrian people as their champion; he is the one who is freeing them from the stranglehold of the terrorists in such places as Aleppo.  Consequently, against all odds and predictions, Assad has the growing support of the Syrian Army, which is ridding the country of foreign sponsored terrorism.”

Aleppo, the industrial center of Syria and its second largest city, is in near ruins. Nonetheless, the ouster of terrorists by the Syrian army marks a decisive milestone in the war to free Syria from ISIL-ISIS, Al Nusra, and Daesh who also occupy other cites such as Idlib and Palmyra.  This is a moment of jubilation for Syrian citizens, a breath of fresh air, and a confidence builder in their fight against terrorism as revealed in the following three short videos. The citizens of Syria back Assad and are cheering for the Syrian army, not against it; these are events not reported by leading media outlets in the West that are committed to ongoing neo-conservative neo-liberal propaganda.

 

https://youtu.be/JzJfefPMbn8

 

https://youtu.be/2KbECuoIppo

 

Given the likelihood that Syrian forces will quickly move to expel the terrorists from other strongholds, President Obama is not cheering, instead, as soon as it became clear that Aleppo would fall, he lifted a previous ban on arm supplies giving the green light for immediate arms shipments to the rebels. Moreover, in 2013 President Obama vowed that he would not put American boots on Syrian ground. Nonetheless, two days before Aleppo fell, when it was imminently clear that the rebel stronghold was about to capitulate, US Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced that the United States is sending 200 additional military personnel to Syria to help defeat ISIL and drive it from its command post in Raqqa.  According to Carter:

“These uniquely skilled operators will join the 300 US special operations forces already in Syria, to continue organizing, training, equipping, and otherwise enabling capable, motivated, local forces to take the fight to ISIL” (NBC News)

NBC News also reports that

“The extra troops will include special operations forces … to recruit, organize, train and advise local Syrian forces to combat ISIS, also known as Islamic State or ISIL.”

Interestingly, “local forces” just assisted the Syrian army to defeat ISIS in Aleppo.  Apparently, someone is not telling the truth here. If what Carter is saying is true, it should be welcome news to the Syrians who have the same goal: to defeat ISIS-ISIL. However, President Assad is sure of the opposite; viz., that the US intends to help the rebels in Raqqa against the advancing Syrian army. According to Assad:

“The question is to whom those armaments are going to? In the hands of whom? In the hands of ISIS and al-Nusra, and there’s coordination between ISIS and al-Nusra. So, the announcement of this lifting of that embargo is related directly to the attack on Palmyra and to the support of other terrorists outside Aleppo, because when they are defeated in Aleppo, the United States and the West, they need to support their proxies somewhere else, because they don’t have any interest in solving the conflict in Syria.”

 According to the Syrian Foreign Ministry:

“The lifting of the ban on arms supplies to Syria by US President Barack Obama is another evidence of Washington’s continuing support for terrorism.”

 

“The United States has provided a new evidence of its notorious role in support for terrorism in Syria by taking the decision to lift the ban on supplying arms to terrorist groups.”

Given the deployment of additional ground troops and an major influx of additional new weaponry, it might be expected that the Syrian Army would now move with earnest rapidity while there is mass confusion on the terrorist side, as new recruits flood their cities and arms flooding in from various directions. The terrorists are in disarray and any attempt to establish central commands in these other locations will necessarily involve days and even weeks of confusion. Consequently, a rapid Syrian advance is likely in areas including Palmyra, Idlib and Raqqa.

Nonetheless, it appears that this might not occur. Speaking at an OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) meeting in Hamburg, Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov stated:

“The decision to ease restrictions on military aid for foreign forces and other fighters supporting the US in Syria is unlikely to affect the situation in eastern Aleppo. Moscow is looking for a solution that involves as few casualties as possible.”

 

“I think everyone understands that the militants in east Aleppo are agonizing. We don’t want to support those who would gladly finish off those militants at any cost without any talks. We are ready to solve these problems in a way that would spare us additional casualties and destruction.”

Because, at this point, (following the fall of Aleppo and on-going weakening of the rebels) it would require an all out ground assault by American and coalition forces to topple Assad; it is likely that all sides will come to the negotiating table as Lavrov has indicated.  However, since the decision belongs to Assad, and not to Russia, the question remains in the air. Assad has made this much clear. In an interview with RT he stated:

“Russia never – these days, I mean, during this war, before that war, during the Soviet Union – never tried to interfere in our decision. Whenever they had opinion or advice, doesn’t matter how we can look at it, they say at the end “this is your country, you know what the best decision you want to take; this is how we see it, but if you see it in a different way, you know, you are the Syrian.” They are realistic, and they respect our sovereignty, and they always defend the sovereignty that’s based on the international law and the Charter of the United Nations. So, it never happened that they made any pressure, and they will never do it. This is not their methodology.”

Clearly, the matter is in the hands of Assad.  Today, we will give him the final word on this topic. In his interview with RT he opined:

“The mainstream media with their fellow politicians, they are suffering during the last few decades from moral decay. So, they have no morals. Whatever they talk about, whatever they mention or they use as mask, human rights, civilians, children; they use all these just for their own political agenda in order to provoke the feelings of their public opinion to support them in their intervention in this region, whether militarily or politically. So, they don’t have any credibility regarding this. If you want to look at what’s happening in the United States is rebellion against the mainstream media, because they’ve been lying and they kept lying on their audiences….That’s why I don’t think the mainstream media could sell their stories anymore and that’s why they are fighting for their existence in the West, although they have huge experience and huge support and money and resources, but they don’t have something very important for them to survive, which is credibility. They don’t have it, they lost it. They don’t have transparency, that’s why they don’t have credibility.”

 

THIS IS A  MUST SEE 49:00 FULL BRIEFING OF US PEACE COUNCIL AT THE UN: TRUTH REGARDING SYRIA – “NOT CIVIL WAR, BUT US INVASION”

https://youtu.be/c8JppJyVxYU