Syrian Endgame, a Lost War is Dangerous – US-NATO, Saudi Arabia, Turkey … losers on the rampage

Published on Global, by Prof. Tim Anderson, Feb 14, 2016.

… Yet the dangers are very real because the Saudis and Turkey might react unpredictably, faced with the failure of their five year project to carve up Syria. Both countries have threatened to invade Syria, to defend their ‘assets’ from inevitable defeat from the powerful alliance Syria has forged with Russia, Iran, Iraq and the better party of Lebanon.  

It should be clear by now that every single anti-government armed group in Syria has been created by Washington and its allies. Several senior US officials have admitted the fact. Regime change has always been the goal. Nevertheless, the charade of a ‘War on ISIS’ goes on, with a compliant western media unwilling to point out that ‘the emperor has no clothes’ … //

… Finally the agreement on ‘cessation of hostilities’, due almost immediately, has a task force to oversee the details. This ceasefire does not apply to any group identified by the UN Security Council as a terrorist group. That immediately rules out ISIS or Jabhat al Nusra. The major obstacle here is that Russia wants Jaysh al Islam and Ahrar as Sham (which have both collaborated with al Nusra for many years) added to the UNSC list. If Washington agrees to this, they will virtually abandon their ‘moderate rebel’ option. There is no other force of substance on the ground. The Saudis and Erdogan would be furious.

How will the US manage these tensions? The Obama administration has always approached the Syrian conflict in an arms-length way, reminiscent of the CIA’s ‘plausible deniability’ over its death squads in Latin America. But credibility problems have grown and Washington does seem more concerned at finding a way out rather than risking a new desperate gambit. That would certainly lead to serious escalation, and without any guarantee of success.

Would Washington allow Erdogan and the Saudis to initiate a major escalation, without US approval? I think not. Obama resisted Saudi and Israeli provocations, when the Iran deal was imminent. Even Bush could not be provoked into a confrontation with Russia, when invited by Georgia’s Mikheil Saakashvili.

For its part, Russia is well prepared for a provocation across the Turkish border. Logic suggests that the losers must lose. But this is a dangerous time.

(full text).

(Prof. Tim Anderson’s Archive on Global

Syria Related Links:

Other Links:

Die Lage, im Spiegel, von Dirk Kurbjuweit, 17. Feb 2016; /Newsletter bestellen;

Automation may mean a post-work society but we shouldn’t be afraid, on The Guardian, by Paul Mason, Feb 17, 2017;

Silicon Valley vs Washington: the new digital divide, on Financial Times /Columnist, by John Thornhill, Feb 16, 2016:  it would be a tragedy if the promise of technology was sideswiped by a neo-Luddite backlash;

Buy-to-let: can you – and should you – set up as a company to avoid tax hit? on The, Feb 16, 2016;

[Politique Fiction] 2017: Et si c’était possible, dans, par Christophe L., le 16 févr 2016: et si la politique ne se résumait pas à des effets d’annonces et une lutte d’égos?

Lithuania attemps to tackle its alcohol crisis with welfare cuts, on, by Daiva Repeckaite, Feb 15, 2016;

Compte Personnel d’Activité CPA … et la retraite? dans Huffington Blogs, by Minetou Ndiaye, Feb 15, 2016;

On Spiegel Online International resp Spiegel

Von Deutschland+Russland auf YouTube hochgeladen:

… and this – Lisa Stansfield:

Comments are closed.