Small Wars Journal

Obama’s Fatal Fatalism in the Middle East

Mon, 05/23/2016 - 5:41am

Obama’s Fatal Fatalism in the Middle East by Fred Hiatt, Washington Post

Surveying the wreckage of the Middle East and the fraying of Europe, President Obama understandably would like us to believe that no other policy could have worked better.

The United States has tried them all, his administration argues: massive invasion, in Iraq; surgical intervention, in Libya; studied aloofness, in Syria. Three approaches, same result: chaos and destruction.

So why bother? Why get sucked into “a transformation that will play out for a generation,” as Obama described it in his State of the Union address this year, “rooted in conflicts that date back millennia”?

Even setting aside the offensiveness of such a sweeping dismissal of Arab potential, the formulation is wrong on two counts, one prescriptive and one analytical…

Read on.

Comments

Outlaw 09

Fri, 07/15/2016 - 12:40am

The Obama admin leaned on Russia to save its bacon in Syria repeatedly and was burned every time. No lessons learned https://www.commentarymagazine.com/f...russian-hands/

American Power in Russian Hands

Noah Rothman / July 14, 2016

You would think that Barack Obama would have learned his lesson by now. You would be wrong.

Quote:

According to reporting by the Washington Post’s Josh Rogin, the United States has proposed to cooperate with Russia in the skies over Syria. The proposed plan would create a new joint military command-and-control office where both nations’ militaries could coordinate their strikes on terrorist targets. What’s troubling in this proposal, however, is it would appear to prioritize Russian targets and, thus, Russian interests.

“Overall, the proposal would dramatically shift the United States’ Syria policy by directing more American military power against Jabhat al-Nusra, which unlike the Islamic State is focused on fighting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad,” read Rogin’s dispatch. The proposal would ostensibly allow the United States to draw Russia into making more strikes on ISIS targets, which it has been previously reluctant to do, jointly with American forces. In the event, however, that there was a substantial threat to its Assad regime allies from Nusra or the terror group advanced beyond unspecified “designated areas,” the Russian air force could act unilaterally.

How this proposal advances American interests in the region is subject to interpretation. The risks, meanwhile, are clear, present, and simply cataloged:

Kerry sees the proposal as a way to reduce the violence in Syria and ground the regime’s air force. The risk is that attacking Jabhat al-Nusra in conjunction with the Russians will spur terrorist recruiting, increase civilian casualties and put the United States firmly on the wrong side of the revolution in the eyes of the Syrian people. Also, there’s no enforcement mechanism if the Putin or Assad regimes violate their commitments — as they have consistently done until now.

Secondly, this pact would ratify what Russia partially achieved with its “de-confliction” agreement with the United States: the legitimization of its military intervention in Syria. And if Russia’s intervention in Syria is legitimate, then so are the interests it is defending: namely, the preservation of the genocidal Bashar al-Assad regime.

In the absence of a multinational coalition, Barack Obama has never been comfortable with anything more than pinprick precision displays of kinetic American military power. In Syria, the president has been losing members of that anti-ISIS coalition for some time, and Russia’s addition might suffice to mollify some of their concerns about the appearance of unilateralism. The president has, however, been relying on Russia to effectively manage American interests in the Middle East for years and has repeatedly been burned in the process.

In his desperation to avoid following through with his “red line” for action in Syria in the autumn of 2013, after a series of mass casualty chemical weapons attacks on civilian populations by Assad forces, the president leaned on Russia. In a prime-time address to the nation, Obama announced that Moscow had agreed to broker a third way in which they would oversee the removal of chemical weapons from Syria so that American airstrikes can be avoided. Today, chemical weapons stockpiles are still in Assad regime hands, as well as in the possession of terror groups like ISIS, and American airstrikes were not averted.

Russian support for Assad, welcomed by an American administration that continued to issue contradictory calls for the Syrian dictator’s abdication, was a great success. Russia bought time for his forces, which were beleaguered and collapsing by October of 2013, and they secured their last post-Soviet port on the Mediterranean at Tartus. But those gains could not be sustained forever without direct intervention. After weeks of importing support personnel and equipment, a Russian three-star general marched into the American embassy in Baghdad with a simple message. Federation air strikes on “terrorist” targets in Syria would begin momentarily. “If you have forces in the area we request they leave,” he reportedly said. Russian forces immediately began harassing American drones, shadowing Turkish fighter planes, and seeking to push the West out of theater by force.

Even after all this, the Obama administration continued to hope that Russia could somehow extricate itself from the Syrian nightmare it allowed to metastasize through inaction. Even as Russian forces reportedly deployed cluster munitions on civilian targets and targeted brick-and-mortar hospitals with airstrikes, the White House still begged the Kremlin to impose a ceasefire on the belligerents in Syria. Time and again, the administration has been disappointed by their Russian counterparts, but that disappointment never seems to dissuade them from taking another kick at the football.

It should be abundantly clear by now that this administration will never be comfortable with America’s prohibitive military power. They would prefer to be used and embarrassed by their erstwhile partners in the Russian government than to unapologetically pursue American interests and grand strategy. In Syria, in particular, the Obama administration’s reputation has been severely damaged. If only the White House could see it.

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 12:41pm

Footage of the Russian-hit WasteTruck in Aleppo city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZeEXzgFRUs

Cut diesel & fuel (->water supply), prevent food from getting in, cause death & injuries by bombings, hit the waste disposal system.

What Putin does in Aleppo now is called Biological Warfare, according to the Oxford Journal.

This is to speed up the spread of epidemics in the besieged areas ... Simply unbelievable ...

Unthinkable
After cutting fresh water supplies, #Russia dropped precision bombs on Turkish-delivered garbage trucks.

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 4:06am

Air strikes on Aleppo have been non stop today this is the heaviest Russian attacks since their intervention, their priority is obviously not ISIS

REMEMBER..but maybe the Obama/Rhodes WH did not get the message...WHEN the Syrian Russian Ambassador recently stated Aleppo was not going to be attacked by Assad....?????

REMEMBER when Assad gave an interview where he stated he was going to recapture all of Syrian including Aleppo and the Russian UN Ambassador waved the comment off??????

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 3:29pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Russia jets recently killed 135 civilian relatives of US-backed rebels in no-man's land on #Syria-Jordan border.

Moscow *will* push back against some items of #Obama’s proposal tomorrow with Sec. Kerry, but core points likely to soon be attempted.

No underestimating how much this will, for many Syrians, “prove” Jabhat al-Nusra’s narrative was “right” all along.

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 3:29pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Russia jets recently killed 135 civilian relatives of US-backed rebels in no-man's land on #Syria-Jordan border.

Moscow *will* push back against some items of #Obama’s proposal tomorrow with Sec. Kerry, but core points likely to soon be attempted.

No underestimating how much this will, for many Syrians, “prove” Jabhat al-Nusra’s narrative was “right” all along.

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 3:09am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Michael Weiss ‏@michaeldweiss
Obama administration, knowing how Assad's Air Force and military work, is licensing war crimes here:

Just stunning. In this passage US commits itself to the "defense of Syrian government forces"

Michael Weiss ‏@michaeldweiss
Which is not quite "de-conflicting," is it? Obama has shown his true colors. He is rewarding a genocidaire.

BLUF...is the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry/Russian WH in fact now truly and totally complicit in the war crimes and genocide being carried out by both Assad and Putin.......

Really does create the "perception" that Obama/Kerry fully and completely support war crimes and genocide against the Syrian civil society especially Arab Sunni's....does it not??????

FOR those that do not fully understand the word "complicit"

"choosing to be involved in an illegal or questionable act, especially with others" OR "helping to commit a crime or do wrong in some way" OR
"involved with others in an activity that is unlawful or morally wrong"

Based on this simple definition of "complicit" the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry/Russian WH is currently actually fully "complicit" in Syrian war crimes and genocide as they have full knowledge that it is ongoing YET chose to not take any form of action......

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 2:51am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

SYRIA: US proposes major cooperation with Russia in Syria

Full Text:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/r/201....pdf?tid=a_inl

If this is in fact implemented then the 2016 National Defense Appropriations Act is triggered which clearly and concisely forbid DoD to participate in any actions with the Russian military...penalty was the cutting of DoD funding and having the SecDef answer about this violation to Congress...

Am honestly surprised that the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry/Russian WH is willing to confront Congress and risk DoD funds getting cut....

WHAT many do not realize is that DoD formally cut all Russian military ties in 2014 after Crimea....hitting hard the Russian MoD prestige event Atlas Vision which was to have a US BCT exercise a peacekeeping exercise in Russia and then a Russian peacekeeping Bde exercise in Germany...

BY deliberating killing civilians under the guise of targeting JaN even in areas where there is no JaN the Russian MoD is trying to force DoD to restart joint Russian US military planning and actions.....THUS giving the Russian MoD a tremendous prestige boost....and showing to the world they are equal to the US in all aspects even militarily thus Russia is an equal superpower.

BUT the US DoD is totally correct in their assessment that the Russians have held to virtually nothing that they tell the US nor have they held to a single point in the Minsk 1&2 agreements....

BUT the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry/Russian WH is so hell bent on achieving "something as a legacy success" they are openly willing to sacrifice Ukrainian and Syrian lives to achieve it.....

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 2:39am

NOW convince me that the "do nothing stupid" members of the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry/Russian WH do not have the same exact information...difference is they choose not to act on it.......

Syria is a catastrophe and on the verge of genocide — by @JulianRoepcke @BjoernStritzel
http://read.bi/29DCBU0

Julian Röpcke ‏@JulianRoepcke
Thank you so much @HadiAlabdallah, @JeffWhite25, @M_Alneser, @michaelh992 & many others in & outside Syria for making this article possible!

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/14/2016 - 2:35am

While the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry/Russian WH continues to "do nothing stupid"
...Rome is literally burning to the ground....around those "that do nothing stupid"....

Remember the "intl. community" demanding humanitarian access to #Daraya in February?!

It's half its size now due to the regime offensive.

Ariha, #Rastan, #Daraya, #Douma, #Aleppo etc.
#Assad and #Putin caused multiple massacres across #Syria today.

DAY4 of the total #Aleppo siege.
#FOOD markets stay closed.
#FAMILIES use their stocks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZokCCpB4OlM

Most #food shops remain closed in #Aleppo today.
Kilo price for eggplant and tomatoes went up to 2 €.
That's what ppl. earn per day.

Big event for #Assad/#Putin/#YPG-displaced children in #FreeSyria's #Azaz city.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyoXziC36hM

Also in totally besieged #EastGhouta, ppl try to flee #Assad where there is nowhere to go...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ThY8vt1vO0

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 12:03pm

Michael Weiss ‏@michaeldweiss

Bizarre to see Obama admin deny Iran-AQ connection.
http://tws.io/2a7SC02

They sanctioned this guy in 2011:

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 11:00am

Somehow the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH seem to always forget the other players of the ME that are just as involved as are the Russians....notice they do not approach them ........

"Reconciliation with Assad"...
As I said before: Turkey learned from its past mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_K-7vYHx8A

Kerry seems to forget that any US participation with Russia will signal to those players that they can now make their own moves in a much more open way and I do not think Kerry and Obama will like those moves...nor will Putin and Assad......

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:56am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Remember this is the same exact Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH that stated in 2014...."we will judge the Russians on their actions not their words"....AND YET Kerry states again..."we will see if they are serious"...the same exact words he used to entice the anti Assad opposition to Geneva....

Well here are the Russian actions...and where is the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry response...????

Douma city today
#Assad's terrorism vs. women and children continues throughout the country
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83NP...ature=youtu.be

Heavy regime air strikes around Zahra in southern #Hama province.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZdA7LtEPTA

(Graphic) #footage
Deadly #Assad/#Putin air strikes on #Ariha in #Idlib province shortly ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXJWSg63CZI

Terrible and graphic!
Another civilian casualty of #Assad's attacks on #Talbisah.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRk_G_PCb5g

Air strikes joined artillery and MLRS attacks on #Talbisah.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8YMOMrVNzY

64 civilians including 13 children killed across #Syria yesterday.
- LCC

Well we have the Russian actions and what do we hear from the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH......nothing but the sound of silence....

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:47am

The Obama/Rhodes/Kerry Russian WH has no earthly idea of what they are exactly doing...and again this is their famous mantra of.... "not doing something stupid"....

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-in-syria.html

07.13.16 7:00 AM ET

Pentagon Resists Obama’s New Plan to Work With the Russians in Syria

The White House is pushing to cooperate with Putin’s forces in the fight against ISIS. But many in the U.S. military are saying: No way.

Quote:

The Obama administration has increasingly warmed to a Russian proposal that allows U.S. forces to coordinate with the Kremlin in the ongoing war against ISIS in Syria. But the White House is facing major resistance to the idea from the U.S. military and those in the intelligence community who are working with local Syrian opposition forces—the very government officials who would carry out such a plan.

The pushback comes as the U.S. has reportedly sent a proposal to Russia to share information about specific targets to strike in Syria. Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin Thursday in part to discuss the plan.

Some Pentagon officials already are saying it won’t work. They have suggested that should the U.S. and Russia agree to increased coordination, they will lobby to share as little with the Russians as possible.

There are discussions in the Pentagon about narrowing the extent of the coordination and the amount of intelligence shared, a U.S. defense official explained to The Daily Beast.

The Russians, two defense officials said, could not be trusted to honor any agreement, saying they believe Moscow would eventually exploit any agreement to bolster the regime—and weaken Syria’s beleaguered rebel fighters. As one U.S.official asked: “What do we gain?”

The internal debate about how much to expand U.S. coordination with the Russians has exposed perhaps the greatest schism within the administration this year over the way ahead in Syria.

Will it help end the war—and if so—for which side? Will it lead to a weaker ISIS and al Qaeda in Syria or an emboldened Russia and Syrian President Bashar al Assad?

The U.S. officials supporting increased coordination believe that ultimately Russia wants a political solution—an agreement between Assad and the rebels. Increased coordination could induce Russia to broker such a deal. On the ground, increased coordination could reduce civilian casualties and weaken terror groups like Jabhat al Nusra, al Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria, one administration official explained to The Daily Beast.

“The regime needs to... end the indiscriminate use of weapons, including the targeting of civilians and civilian authorities, and including medical ones. And we look to the Russians to make a greater use of the influence that we know that they have to make that happen,” State Department spokesman John Kirby explained to reporters last week.

But for others in the U.S. government, there are concrete reasons, presented in just the last few weeks, not to trust the Kremlin. Russia is believed to have attacked Pentagon-backed and trained forces in southern Syria last month, even after the U.S. reached out to the Russians to alert them about who they were striking. Russia denied striking the rebels, stationed near the Jordan border.

For others at the State Department, Russia is not a partner in Syria but the country whose police forces attacked a U.S. diplomat entering the embassy in Moscow over the weekend, leading to an expulsion and counter expulsion of diplomats.

The State Department said Russian police “attacked” the diplomats. Last month, Kerry raised the issue of how diplomats are being treated with the very Russian officials he is now discussing a military coordination plan with.

And in the nine months since Russia began its strike campaign on behalf of Assad, there have been a series of broken agreements.

In May, for example, there was an agreed ceasefire between Russia and the United States in the Syrian city of Aleppo. And yet, despite those calls to stop fighting, just over the weekend, with the help of Russian air strikes, the Syrian army claimed control of Castello Road, a key rebel route out of Aleppo.

The U.S. has been trying to get its Syrian rebel allies to separate themselves from Nusra, so far without success, because the Islamist group is among the most effective anti-Assad forces. The Russians have said that with the moderate rebels interspersed with Nusra, it’s hard to bomb al Qaeda without also bombing the moderate rebels. Moscow says it needs to know where the American-backed rebels are so its forces don’t hit them by accident.

Opponents to such coordination sense a Russian trap. Two U.S. defense officials explained to The Daily Beast that they believe the Russians will use such coordination to shift the discussion about Syria away from Assad’s removal and toward weakening his opponents, like Jabhat al Nusra. Moreover, they fear that once Russia, with U.S. help, pushes back the al Qaeda affiliate, they will renege on promises to spare the U.S.-backed moderate Syrian opposition, thereby “eliminating the two greatest threats to the Assad regime,” the U.S. official explained.

“Russia is framing this offer in terms of counterterrorism and is proposing joint operations against both Jabhat al Nusra and ISIS, but of course Russia’s current campaign does not actually make such distinctions. The issue on the table, therefore, is whether it’s possible for the U.S. to redirect Russia into an actual counterterrorism alliance in which Russia halts targeting of acceptable opposition groups,” Jennifer Cafarella, a Syria analyst at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War, explained to The Daily Beast.

U.S. defense officials said that working with Moscow would give credibly to a far less precise Russian military air campaign, one that has, by everyone’s measure, killed far more civilians in Syria than the U.S.-backed coalition.

“Why give [the Russians] legitimacy?” one defense official asked.

And perhaps most importantly to those working with local forces, they fear that any agreement could cost the U.S. credibility with local forces who are working with them.

The U.S. and Russia already communicate to ensure there are no accidents in the air over Syria and that U.S.-backed opposition forces are not struck. There is no coordination of attacks, but rather an exchange of limited information to prevent unintended strikes.

The pressure on the Pentagon to embrace increased Russian coordination has begun to creep into the public discourse. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, who once flatly closed the door to increased Russian coordination, opened that door ever so slightly late last month.

“If the Russians would do the right thing in Syria, and that’s an important condition, as in all cases with Russia, we’re willing to work with them,” Carter told reporters at a June 30 briefing.

The U.S. has been divided for years about how to deal with Nusra, which the U.S. declared al Qaeda in December 2012. The U.S. now sees the ongoing expansion al Qaeda affiliate as dangerous.

“In Syria, as [ISIS] is losing territory in the east, its terrorist rival—Jabhat al-Nusra—is gaining ground in the west,” Brett McGurk, the U.S. special presidential envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter IS, said June 28 in written testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Kerry arrives in Moscow Thursday, in part, “to test how serious the Russians are about using their influence in a constructive way in Syria,” a second U.S. official explained.
Remember this is the same exact Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH that stated in 2014...."we will judge the Russians on their actions not their words"....AND YET Kerry states again..."we will see if they are serious"...the same exact words he used to entice the anti Assad opposition to Geneva....

The Russians have held to not a single thing they have stated they would do in eastern Ukraine and in Syria so why is Kerry even trying?????

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:30am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

"Russia is framing offer in terms of counterterrorism but Russia's current campaign does not make such distinctions"

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:24am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

AND here is the Russian answer to Kerry, Obama and Rhodes.....

And this morning we have reports of Russia bombing a refugee camp housing families of US backed anti-ISIS fighters

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:19am

AND it just keeps getting worse ...on what is coming out of the so called Obama/Rhodes/Kerry Russian WH for US FP......

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...517_story.html

As Kerry pushes for coordination with Russia in Syria, others in administration cry foul

By Karen DeYoung July 12 at 7:32 PM 

Quote:

The Obama administration’s offer to coordinate air attacks in Syria with Russia has opened a deepening rift between senior national security officials who insist it could quiet Syria’s civil carnage and further larger counterterrorism goals, and those who consider it a counterproductive sellout to the Kremlin.

Secretary of State John F. Kerry, who said last month that reaching an “understanding” with Russia was “the most important thing” in moving Syria forward, plans to push the deal when he meets Thursday in Moscow with President Vladi#mir Putin.

The U.S. proposal, which has not been made public, calls for the establishment of a “Joint Implementation Group” with Russia, through which the two countries would initially exchange intelligence and operational information on the locations of Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, and “synchronize” their independent operations against the Islamic State. Once al-Nusra targets have been agreed, they would determine what action to take and “deconflict” their air operations.

In exchange, Moscow would use its leverage to effectively ground Syria’s air force, limiting its operations to non-combat humanitarian and medical-evacuation missions. Both the United States and Russia would recommit themselves to pushing for a political settlement to Syria’s civil war.

Kerry is “extremely frustrated,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said. “And that’s one of the reasons why we’re going to Moscow, to see if that change is actually going to be possible — if the Russians are going to do what they’ve said they were going to do.” Administration officials have declined to discuss details of the proposal.

Despite a cease-fire ostensibly in effect since February, Syrian planes have kept up a steady bombardment of both civilian and opposition sites — where they have argued that al-Nusra forces, exempt from the truce, are mixed with rebel groups covered by the accord. After observing the early weeks of the cease-fire, Russian planes joined the Syrian forces, including in an offensive last weekend that took over the only remaining supply route for both rebels and civilians hunkered down in the northern city of Aleppo.

After days of air bombardment riddled an area only a few miles wide, Syrian forces and allied militiamen from Iraq, Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah militant group took up positions above what is known as the Castello Road leading to Turkey. Artillery, rockets and surface-to-surface missiles have struck dozens of passenger cars and minibuses that attempted to drive the route, rebel spokesmen said. The area is so dangerous, they said, they have been unable to retrieve scores of bodies still trapped in the destroyed vehicles.

On Monday, rebel forces shelled government-held areas of the city, killing scores of residents, according to Syrian state media.

With government forces now virtually surrounding the city, the United Nations on Tuesday expressed concern about a prolonged siege. U.N. officials estimated that 300,000 civilians stuck inside the area would be cut off from dwindling supplies of food and medical care, as well as from their only escape route.

A new coordination agreement with Moscow, supporters within the administration argue, would save lives by stopping air attacks on civilians and opposition fighters, while simultaneously increasing the focus on al-Nusra, a shared U.S.-Russian enemy. Al-Nusra forces are amassed south of Aleppo, but their scattered presence among rebel fighters to the north has been used as an excuse for both Syrian government and Russian attacks.

But as Kerry and Robert Malley, the chief White House point man on Syria, negotiate with the Kremlin, a growing chorus of defense, diplomatic and intelligence officials have voiced objections.

“We do this, and then what?” said a U.S. official, one of several who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the issue and feared identification as internal critics.

“You need to solve the Assad problem, because as long as Assad is in power, Syria is a failed state. And as long as it’s a failed state, it will be a breeding ground for extremists,” including the Islamic State and al-Nusra, the official said.

This official and others, in comments that were echoed across a wide range of outside Syria experts, said that the proposed deal does not appear to affect Syrian or Russian ground operations — including extensive Russian artillery being used in the Aleppo offensive — and does nothing to force Assad to negotiate a political end to the war, something both he and Russia agreed to as part of the original cease-fire arrangement.

“I don’t understand how Kerry walks away from this saying he got something,” said Andrew J. Tabler of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “It’s all in the name of saying . . . that they’re saving lives and targeting terrorists. But what it will do strategically will mean the regime will simply stand by while we hit the terrorists, and the regime will benefit from that.”

“This is defeat,” Tabler said. “I think everybody is beside themselves because this is all being done in the name of a cease-fire . . . the best thing we can do to reduce the violence. But in effect, it’s crafted in such a way that it strengthens the regime, the opposite of what we say we want.”

Frederic C. Hof of the Atlantic Council, who served as the administration’s special adviser for Syria until resigning in late 2012, advised the administration to “take a deep breath and think things through very carefully.”

“As desirable as it is to damage a loathsome al-Qaeda entity, military collaboration with Russia could also exact long-term costs to America’s reputation and the broader fight against extremism, costs potentially far exceeding the benefits of a here-and-now body count,” Hof wrote in the Huffington Post on Tuesday.

Internal disagreement over Syria policy has plagued the administration for years. In 2012, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued for the use of military force against Assad and for the establishment of opposition safe zones. In addition, then-CIA Director David H. Petraeus recommended arming and training anti-Assad opposition forces.

President Obama rejected both proposals and, to the consternation of most of his national security cabinet, pulled back in 2013 from an agreed plan to bomb Syrian military targets to punish Assad for the use of chemical weapons.

Among the many arguments against the currently proposed deal with Russia, the Pentagon has insisted that Moscow has demonstrated — in Syria, Ukraine and elsewhere — that it simply cannot be trusted.

The stated purpose of airstrikes that Russia began last fall was “to fight ISIL and . . . assist the political transition in Syria towards a post-Assad government,” Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said late last month. “They haven’t done either of those things.”

ISIL, along with ISIS and Daesh, is an alternative term for the Islamic State.

While Kerry has long advocated for U.S. military action against Assad, he believes that the highest priority now must be to stop the violence generated by Syrian government airstrikes. He feels that any downside to cooperation with Russia would be mitigated by the pressure Moscow could bring on Assad and gains against an al-Nusra organization that remains a vital component of al-Qaeda’s international operations.

OUTLAW 09 is online now Report Post

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 4:03am

Thanks to Russia & international silence, Assad cuts last road to Aleppo, moving in for the kill http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/12/assad-cuts-the-last-ro…

This is the perfect example of doing something "stupid" while not trying to do something "stupid".....

Proves to the entire ME Arab Sunni world as well as the global Sunni community the US and Russia did in fact have a "golden handshake"....

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 3:39am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

So in addition to bombing a group fighting (only) ISIS it seems yesterday Russia also bombed refugees near the Jordanian border

AND what was the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH response......crickets...crickets....

The Castillo road yday.
Heavy fighting,heavy shelling,and no getting through for civilians.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi1Fsv4C1oc

After #Russia bombing the last convoys and the #Castillo road blocked, diesel & fuel becomes rare in #Aleppo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9fMrJ4jL3o

Seemingly more #Nusra troops moved to the #Castillo road to open it once again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-qKosUgLS0

FOOD prices rose dramatically in #Aleppo as the total siege is now 72 hours.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ7UOa5fwEk

A single brave journalist team took the #Castillo "road of death" today.
Not a single supply truck, no civilians.
https://youtu.be/3ZzO8tjjU1M

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 3:30am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Notice just how some fully understand JaN (AQ) and where they are located and the entire Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH have absolutely no idea......

As others pointed out correctly Nusra mostly withdrew from N. Aleppo last August. Small group of 50-60 had remained, until today.

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 3:28am

Finally discovered the actual highly successful Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH Syrian/IS strategy.....

Strengthening and directly supporting the Syrian AQ JaN...as what many ME subject matter experts had warned them would in fact happen with their not wanting to do anything "stupid".........

THIS is the direct result of the non interest by the Obama/Rhodes WH that some have predicted will occur......non Western interest is actually strengthening JaN (AQ)....

Situation in #Syria: Only hard line Islamists left to defend anti regime civilians against regime. We're watching it grow in strength and with every new combat success.

How do you expect hundreds of thousands of civilians to reject #Nusra as "too extreme" when they keep fighting for the lives of the ppl. ...

Jabhat al-Nusra and al-Zanki capture positions inside Malah north Aleppo & advancing. No signs of Jaish al-Fath.

Aleppo : Heavy fighting continues in #Al_Mallah as Opposition advance on the #Talat_Al_Mayasat area and #Breij.

Drone footage of storming Assad army positions in Malah farms y'day.
https://youtu.be/faP4k_I5xm0

Footage from #Mallah shows despite Regime claims last km b4 Castello Rd is no man's land. 1st def line: Arab Selloum

Combat footage: Zinki assault on #Mallah front, N. #Aleppo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi1Fsv4C1oc

Rebels in heart of Arab Selloum, 2.1 km from Castillo Road, #Aleppo
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36....134326&z=16&m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faP4k_I5xm0

JaN and the other anti Assad groups are doing their best to defend Aleppo and 300,000 Sunni's from Assad, Iran and Putin AND yet the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH remain totally silent...and by that silence they are actually signaling their support for the Assad/Iranian and Putin attacks on Aleppo.....

Outlaw 09

Tue, 07/12/2016 - 1:34pm

Appears Kerry, Obama, Rhodes are not quite so well informed on Russian intentions.....especially killing of civilians...

Russian bombers targeted IDP camps east Syria instead of #IS killing 17 ppl according to FSA
https://youtu.be/gPPtkohR5NM

Russian carpet bombing (probably on #ISIS positions) in Eastern Desert filmed by Rebels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPPtkohR5NM

Seems Russia concerned over #ISIS inching closer to #Palmyra as 6 long-range Tu-22M3 bombers reportedly struck ISIS
http://tass.ru/en/defense/887758 …?

17 civilians killed, 40 wounded they say ...
So #Russia sends its Tu-22 thousands of km to bomb displaced refugees instead of #ISIS?! ...

Outlaw 09

Wed, 07/13/2016 - 9:40am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Someone convince me that the Obama/Rhodes/Kerry WH is not doing the FP work for Putin??...because Kerry's actions convince me they are in fact part and parcel of the Putin FP.....so the ugly question does Kerry and Obama actually work for Putin???

NOTICE the voiced fear of the current US FP direction by European leaders...

Michael Weiss ‏@michaeldweiss

Forget Rhodes and Obama. Where does Lavrov stop and John Kerry begin?

http://www.businessinsider.de/john-kerry-jaysh-al-islam-ahrar-al-sham-s…

State Department officials are 'baffled' by John Kerry's latest comments that have 'muddied the waters' in Syria

Quote:

The State Department is reportedly trying to walk back comments that Secretary of State John Kerry made about Syria during an appearance in Aspen, Colorado, last month.

When asked about the US's anti-ISIS strategy in Syria, Kerry said that "the most important thing, frankly, is seeing if we can reach an understanding with the Russians about how to, No. 1, deal with Daesh and al-Nusrah," Kerry said, referring to ISIS and Al Qaeda's offshoot in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra.

Kerry then characterized two other Syrian rebel groups, Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham, as "subgroups" of ISIS and Nusra.

"There are a couple of subgroups underneath the two designated [terrorist groups], Daesh and Jabhat al-Nusra — Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham, particularly — who brush off and fight with that alongside these other two sometimes to fight the Assad regime," he said.

It is true that rebel groups in Syria fighting forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad sometimes coordinate or shift alliances to improve their battlefield odds. Indeed, Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham are members of the Jaysh al-Fateh (Army of Conquest) anti-Assad military alliance that now controls most of Idlib Province.

Neither Jaysh al-Islam nor Ahrar al-Sham, however, is a UN-designated terrorist organization. Both have expressed that they are opposed to ISIS. And neither is beholden to, or takes orders from, Nusra.

The Washington Post's Josh Rogin first noticed the comment, which apparently annoyed State Department officials who say that they have "been arguing to make sure the Russians and the Syrian regime don't equate these groups [Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham] with the terrorists."

"Kerry's line yields that point," a senior administration official told Rogin.

"Baffled. SMH," another said in an email, using an abbreviation for the expression "shaking my head."

State Department spokesman John Kirby confirmed to The Post that the administration's policy with regard to Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham had not changed.

Still, "it's a telling gaffe," Middle East expert Tony Badran, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Business Insider on Tuesday. "And it's revealing about the kind of conversation they're having with the Russians — and where, usually, that conversation leads."

Russia intervened in Syria on behalf of its ally, Assad, in late September. Since then, Moscow has pushed for the UN to list Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham — which are staunchly opposed to Assad — as terrorist organizations. This is for political reasons and to justify its continued strikes on areas of Syria where ISIS, also known as ISIL or the Islamic State, has little to no presence.

Jaysh al-Islam, which is backed by Saudi Arabia, is one of the most important rebel groups in Syria, with a formidable presence east of Syria's capital, Damascus. Mohammed Alloush, a leading Jaysh al-Islam figure, was the chief negotiator for the opposition High Negotiations Committee before he resigned in May, citing a lack of progress on humanitarian issues.

A Russian airstrike targeted and killed the leader of Jaysh al-Islam, Zahran Alloush, in the village of Utaya to the east of Damascus in December.

Ahrar al-Sham, a powerful Islamist rebel brigade headquartered in Syria's Idlib Province, is backed by Turkey and has criticized and clashed with ISIS in the past.

Until now, it has been politically pragmatic for the US to refrain from characterizing Jaysh al-Islam or Ahrar al-Sham as terrorists. Doing so would most likely further undermine peace talks and paint Washington as sympathetic to Russia's bombing campaign — which has frequently targeted rebel groups supported by important US allies and the Central Intelligence Agency.

"Russia considers all revolutionaries and rebel groups as ISIS or al-Nusra to justify its indiscriminate shelling of civilians and the moderate opposition," Mouaz Moustafa, executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, told The Post on Monday.

But the administration's political calculations may be shifting in light of a new proposal by President Barack Obama — which was reportedly opposed by Defense Secretary Ash Carter — to coordinate more closely with the Russians in Syria against Al Qaeda.

Not the first time

It would not be the first time that the Obama administration has touted a Russia-aligned policy in Syria at a politically sensitive moment.

In the midst of a countrywide truce brokered by the US and Russia in late February, US Army Col. Steve Warren, then the spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve in Iraq, was asked whether Russian airstrikes on Aleppo — the epicenter of the war since late last year — meant that Moscow was preparing to end the cessation-of-hostilities agreement.

Warren responded that it was "complicated" because Nusra "holds Aleppo" and is not party to the agreement.

Many experts and analysts were quick to point out, however, that Nusra has never controlled Aleppo nor maintained a significant presence there. While Nusra had indeed been building up its presence in Aleppo since February, the city is also occupied by civilians and armed opposition groups associated with the US-backed Free Syrian Army that agreed to abide by the fragile agreement.

As Middle East analyst Kyle Orton noted on Twitter at the time, Warren came "pretty close" to saying that the coalition supported Russia's airstrikes in the city.

Then as now, observers wondered whether Warren had misspoken. But the US has been steadily accommodating an increasing number of Russian demands in Syria, including one to urge the moderate opposition to stop comingling with Nusra so that Moscow can bomb its positions — even though, some rebels have complained, weakening Nusra would mean strengthening Assad.

For the US's top diplomat to now indicate that he agrees with Russia's characterization of Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham as terrorist groups sends more mixed signals — whether to Syrian rebels or political allies — about Washington's commitment to the opposition it claims to support.

Writing in the pan-Arab daily newspaper Al-Hayat, Ibrahim Hamidi noted that European diplomats were unnerved by what they perceived as a bilateral discussion between Washington and Moscow that had gone over their heads — and were engaged in intense discussions about how to "control the Obama administration's rush toward the Russian position on Syria."

And rebels are reportedly concerned that Washington's new cooperation with the Russians means "dismantling Jaysh al-Fateh, which opens the door to a regime victory and reproducing the regime with Russian backing," Hamidi added.

Continued.....

In any case, analysts agree that Kerry's comments bizarrely — and inaccurately— conflated roughly five different rebel groups in Syria that are either military allies or in competition with one another.

"It's true that the groups fighting Assad are hard to distinguish and often co-mingle, but US policy is based on knowing which are which," Rogin wrote. "Kerry muddied the waters. That's typically Moscow's job."

Outlaw 09

Tue, 07/12/2016 - 1:23pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

This is in fact a serious comment....

Michael Weiss ‏@michaeldweiss

Forget Rhodes and Obama. Where does Lavrov stop and John Kerry begin?

So it begins: Cajoled by #Obama, #Kerry calls Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham "subgroups" of terror organisations.
http://wpo.st/-vMl1

Calling Ahrar al-Sham & Jaysh al-Islam "subgroups" of al-Qa'eda (al-Nusra) is a disingenuous lie; a loophole to justify bombing them.

The #US will probably end up indiscriminately bombing anti-Assad forces alongside the RuAF. Save those that reach a "ceasefire" (surrender).

Outlaw 09

Tue, 07/12/2016 - 12:31pm

NOW we can see exactly how Kerry has blown it again ......this is not the first time he has misspoken to the point that it makes one think he actually works as the DoS for Putin....BUT again maybe he is just channeling the Obama/Rhodes WH thinking on Syria......

Charles Lister ‏@Charles_Lister
Kerry buying #Russia's position?
Appears so

John Kerry labeled Ahrar al-Sham & Jaish al-Islam "subgroups" of AQ & #ISIS last week.

By Josh Rogin July 12 at 7:01 AM 

Quote:

While the United States and Russia inch closer to more military cooperation in Syria on the ground, Secretary of State John F. Kerry is sounding more and more like he agrees with the Russian view of the Syrian rebel groups fighting against the Assad regime.

Late last month in Aspen, Colo., Kerry said the most important thing the administration is doing to ramp up the effort to defeat extremists in Syria is to “reach an understanding” with the Russian government about how to deal with the terrorists there, which he names as the Islamic State, often referred to as Daesh, and Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s Syrian branch. As I reported, Kerry and President Obama have proposed to Moscow increased cooperation against those groups, especially Jabhat al-Nusra, in exchange for Russia convincing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to abide by the crumbling cease-fire and lay off bombing the other rebels.

But then Kerry, perhaps accidentally, threw two other Syrian rebel groups under the bus by calling them “subgroups” of the terrorists.

“There are a couple of subgroups underneath the two designated — Daesh and Jabhat al-Nusra — Jaysh al-Islam, Ahrar al-Sham particularly — who brush off and fight with that — alongside these other two sometimes to fight the Assad regime,” he said, referring to two rebel groups that the United States has not named as terrorist groups until now.

The remark, which went largely unnoticed by the media in Aspen, nonetheless set off alarm bells inside the Obama administration. Two administration officials who work on Syria told me that Kerry’s naming of the Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham as “subgroups” of the terrorist organizations was not only inaccurate but potentially harmful to U.S. government efforts to convince the Russians and the Syrian government not to attack them.

“For months, we’ve been arguing to make sure the Russians and the Syrian regime don’t equate these groups with the terrorists,” one senior administration official told me. “Kerry’s line yields that point.”

Another U.S. official simply emailed, “Baffled. SMH[Shaking my head].”

State Department spokesman John Kirby told me that there has been “absolutely no change” in the U.S. government’s support for the policy that only groups designated by the United Nations as terrorists groups should be excluded from the cease-fire, also known as the “cessation of hostilities.”

“Secretary Kerry was simply trying to describe the complexity of the situation in Syria, noting that we aren’t blind to the notion that some fighters shift their loyalties,” he said.

Even if Kerry misspoke, some Syrian groups see his comments as an example of how the Obama administration has slowly but steadily moved toward the Russian view of Syria, which includes painting all opposition groups as terrorists.

“Russia considers all revolutionaries and rebel groups as ISIS or al-Nusra to justify its indiscriminate shelling of civilians and the moderate opposition,” said Mouaz Moustafa, executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, an American nongovernmental organization that works with Syrian rebel groups.

Ahrar al-Sham is made up of Islamic and Salafist units and does not believe in a secular, democratic Syria, but it is not an al-Qaeda subsidiary and doesn’t take direction from Jabhat al-Nusra, Moustafa said. Jaysh al-Islam is supported by U.S. allies including Saudi Arabia and has been part of the opposition negotiating team in the Geneva process.

Russia’s obligation, under the new proposed cooperation deal, is to stop bombing Syrian rebel groups the U.S. declares are not terrorists. It’s true that the groups fighting Assad are hard to distinguish and often co-mingle, but U.S. policy is based on knowing which are which. Kerry muddied the waters. That’s typically Moscow’s job.

Outlaw 09

Tue, 07/12/2016 - 7:24am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

103 Ukrainian troops got either killed or wounded during the first third of July 2016.

Regime/Russia strategy to besiege & starve Rebel-held Aleppo (~300,000 ppl) already producing first food shortages
http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/w...article/469602 …?

Ever notice the deafening silence out of the Obama/Rhodes WH and the utter silence from Kerry now that Minsk 2 has basically failed and the Syrian CoH is/was a farce.....

AND that "moderate" Iranian Deal is fast coming apart with Iran violating it at every turn and yet nothing is said out of the Obama/Rhodes WH.....

Truth catches the Iran deal
http://on.wsj.com/29JBwcR
comments from @mdubowitz.

Outlaw 09

Tue, 07/12/2016 - 6:36am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

The Obama/Rhodes WH has effectively thrown Ukrainians and Syrians under the bus in the name of "legacy"...

Outlaw 09

Tue, 07/12/2016 - 6:34am

So continues the Obama/Rhodes WH "sell out" of US FP ...sorry meant to say..."outsourcing of US FP to Putin".........

Western Betrayal Redux?

To be fair, Outlaw has been on this since Minsk I...

According to Vladimir Socor at the Jamestown Foundation:
1.http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_...c#.V4QgWlYrKUk
2.http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_...4#.V4QgXFYrKUk

•“Quietly but summarily, the administration of President Obama has informed Kyiv that it wants to see elections in Donbas before Obama leaves office”

•Nuland is urging compliance with Ukraine’s political “obligations” under the Minsk “agreement.”

•Kerry and Nuland’s joint visit on July 7, however, has added urgency and even impatience to Kerry’s tone, reflecting the Barack Obama administration’s rush to show results before the November presidential election in the United States

•By the logic and sequence of steps proposed, Ukraine would make pre-emptive, irreversible sacrifices of sovereignty, without any assurance that Russian forces would withdraw or that the two armed “people’s republics” would abdicate. Almost certainly they would not.

•The West may help Russia enforce those political provisions on Ukraine, but the same Western powers cannot help Ukraine enforce those military provisions on Russia.

NOW...a challenge to any SWJ commenter to prove to me the Obama/Rhodes WH, Kerry and Nuland have not "officially" sold out US FP....to anyone that will provide them a "great legacy event".......

This is one of those moments I hate to say this....but "I told you so two years ago....."

The "outsourcing" of US Syrian FP to Putin is actually IMHO even worse as it has led to over 500,000 killed, millions of refugees and IDPs and entire areas of Syria totally destroyed....ALL in the name of not doing something "stupid"......

Outlaw 09

Mon, 07/11/2016 - 12:53pm

After siege on Rebel-held #Aleppo, #RuAF trying now to create fuel shortage in Idlib prov. destroying fuel tankers.

Footage
Number is up to 20 killed in #Russian cluster bomb attack on vital fuel convoy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGBgmC2rB2k

Charles Lister ‏@Charles_Lister
International community still holds out hope that #Syria political process is alive & will move forward soon.

#Aleppo siege will end that.

Outlaw 09

Mon, 07/11/2016 - 1:24pm

Unconfirmed reports rebels gained serious ground in the ongoing offensive inside Aleppo city. So far there is a media black out to confirm.

Except for "deep concerns" here and there, US, EU & Turkey seems to have approved Russia/Assad plan to siege Aleppo.

A heavy Russian airstrike on central #Aleppo killed 10 people & injured 4 more around noon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyUFdEVMmLc

Children among dead in Sunday's west #Aleppo airstrikes
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLNxwX7r4A555-9dkKRfX-c26UsMkHTwb2

Footage
Russian secondary air strike on firefighters in #Idlib province.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niBhtsPTC9o

Burning inferno and heinous attack on first responders by #Russia in #Idlib province.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcsPhjzcxNA

Outlaw 09

Mon, 07/11/2016 - 4:49am

Ah.....those so called "moderate" Iranian supported Iraqi Shi'a militias.....who fought as well and are still fighting inside Syria BUT not against IS....

Fallujah refugees hesitant to return home for fear of Shiite militia
http://goo.gl/k7Lm2x

Same militias the US government assured us were not going into Fallujah.

Outlaw 09

Mon, 07/11/2016 - 4:45am

It is a shame that this ME SME along with three other ME SMEs who really know and understand Syria were never invited to join the discussions inside the Obama/Rhodes WH...maybe then they would not be doing literally hundreds of "stupid things" when it comes to Syria....

http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/co...time-and-again

How Assad has outfoxed his foes time and again

Hassan Hassan

July 10, 2016

Quote:

I remember when I heard that Baghdad had fallen to the US-led coalition in 2003. I was on my way back to university in Damascus from a visit to my home town in Albukamal, in eastern Syria. The news came as we stopped in Palmyra for a half-hour break. For the rest of the trip, gloom and doom dominated among travellers.

For many, such feelings of deep anger and frustration later turned into action. The next time I returned home for another visit, a taxi driver told me that volunteers were flowing from Syria into Iraq. Syrian authorities, the driver said, were not stopping people. Noticing my disbelief, he said that he would drive me to the other side of the border any moment.

The story did not make much sense to me. After all, the Syrian regime was secular and would not tolerate any form of activism, much less one that was expressed in jihadi terms. I asked relatives at home about what the driver said, and they confirmed that two people in my town had travelled to fight with the Iraqi resistance. Albukamal came to be known as the gateway for jihadists pouring from the region into Iraq through Syria.

Rashad Al Kattan, a security risk analyst and a fellow with the Centre for Syrian Studies at the University of St Andrews, was a witness to this activity from his neighbourhood too. Volunteers heading to Albukamal would travel from Damascus.

“My family’s house is near the US embassy in Damascus," recalled Mr Al Kattan. “A few months after the invasion, I started seeing the large green buses used for public transport parked outside the Iraqi embassy, which is opposite the US embassy. It continued for some time but the buses moved to Sumarieh coach station, on the outskirts of the capital, apparently after the Americans complained it was happening under their watch, literally."

In September 2009, former Iraqi prime minister Nouri Al Maliki said that “most terrorists came from Syria". Bashar Al Assad replied that the accusations were “immoral". Less than two years after the Damascus-Baghdad escalation, Mr Al Assad issued an amnesty for jailed jihadists a few months after the eruption of the Syrian uprising. What happened between 2009 and 2011? Did the Assad regime stop seeing jihadists as a useful tool?

I am reminded of the story after the debate that followed the release of the Iraq inquiry report in the Uk. The discussions largely overlooked the cynical game played by Damascus, and seem to have learnt the wrong lessons from the Iraq war. Many of those fired up after the report’s release are guilty of repeating the same mistakes that led to the unimaginable suffering in Iraq today.

For example, those who voted in favour of the Iraq war in the British parliament are arguably no worse than those who voted in the same place against punitive air strikes against Mr Al Assad’s regime after it used chemical weapons against civilians several times. Ideally, the West has no business intervening in the Middle East. But the reality is that western forces are entrenched in the region and therefore have the capacity to play a leadership role. This is called leverage. Those who do not want that leverage to be utilised, in the name of anti-imperialism, are complicit. They are overcorrecting history.

The Assad regime wanted Iraq to turn into hell, and it helped achieve that. The reward the regime wanted was that foreign powers would think twice before they intervened in Syria. It won the Iraq war, with the help of jihadists. When the same regime released extremists from prisons in 2011, it wanted to pull off the same trick. As the uprising turned into a civil war, the regime forces avoided jihadists and targeted the rest. It struck deals with jihadists, and ignored the rest. It traded with jihadists and hit the rest.

The policy worked. Today, the US is seeking a formula of cooperation against those extremists with the Russians in Syria. The circle is complete. The US that failed to rule effectively in Iraq partly because of Mr Al Assad and his allies has, once again, to seek indirect cooperation with Damascus.

For Iraqis and Syrians, much of the discussion about the Iraq inquiry report is beside the point.

Many of the loudest voices after the report was released are fighting a different fight that has little to do with Iraqis. Whether leftists or anti-imperialists, they are fighting the Iraq war through Syria. They do not want to consider the differences between an invasion of a country and the use of force to put an end to continuing butchery. Mr Al Assad wanted them to think twice before intervention, but they do not want to even think about it. They blindly oppose.

Outlaw 09

Sun, 07/10/2016 - 2:41am

Russia's terrorism is only the 2nd worst.
Worst is EU/US silence and inaction on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHhVWIt3QdE

BREAKING FOOTAGE
ALEPPO CITY A SHORT WHILE AGO.
RUSSIA AIR FORCE JET DROPS CLUSTER BOMBS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcbJ1G7N9qQ

BTW..this also applies to eastern Ukraine......where the UAF has had their highest loses since Sept 2015 and the Russian army/militants are constantly attacking the Minsk 2 front line.

Outlaw 09

Sat, 07/09/2016 - 2:09pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Footage
Regime media doesn't make a secret out of its push to cut off Aleppo.
"Ceasefire".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9MIWtAmgno

This is the so called Assad ceasefire which is the same as the Putin ceasefire in eastern Ukraine.....the fighting and killing does not stop and yet the Obama/Rhodes WH remains utterly silent.....

Outlaw 09

Sat, 07/09/2016 - 2:04pm

The killing of civilians which fulfills the definition of genocide and war crimes just continues...with utter silence from the Obama/Rhodes WH......

Just north of #Aleppo today.
Imagine that was your hometown.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3ulfpY4M-8

Aleppo city shortly ago.
More #Assad/#Putin air strikes on civilians.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWaBHPhtyYw

That's the "islamist terrorists", #Assad and #Putin are obliterating in #EastGhouta.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITmPS31E1Os

Outlaw 09

Sat, 07/09/2016 - 12:44pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Charles Lister ‏@Charles_Lister
Things around Aleppo getting v. ugly - siege will have big implications.
Renewed “ceasefire” totally irrelevant.
US seemingly powerless.

"Powerless" is exactly what this Obama/Rhodes WH wants as they attempt to do nothing..."stupid" over the next months before they leave the WH....

Outlaw 09

Sat, 07/09/2016 - 12:38pm

Still not a single response from the Obama/Rhodes WH to the continued killing of civilians......

BreakingFootage
#Rastan some minutes ago.
Endless #Assad/#Putin air strikes / war crimes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4VMI7H5ccg

And today the terror continued inside #Aleppo. Many air strikes.
2 kil, 10 wou in this one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DeTbPPmzW8

Countless #RUS incendiary strikes on towns along the last supply route to #Aleppo last night
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKGbZSBbcZE

Outlaw 09

Sat, 07/09/2016 - 2:45am

For those serious SWJ commenters who truly believe that the Obama/Rhodes WH Syrian/Is FP is really working and saving Syrian lives.....

And for those, doubting.
This video only contains the bearable footage ...
Other is much worse (example below) ...

22 civilians killed & 35 wounded in Assad/Putin ballistic missile attack on Darkush
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMO_6K0aXfw

Madaya today
Newborn child died hours after being born due to malnutrition of mother.
ALEPPO NEXT!

Over the last mins, RUS war planes attacked the last entrance to Aleppo with cluster bombs, supporting combined pro-Assad troops.

Pro-Assad sources confirm,regime troops + allies from Russia and Iran are in the last stage of besieging Aleppo.

Outlaw 09

Sat, 07/09/2016 - 2:34am

BUT WAIT....the Russian Syrian ambassador lied again when he stated Assad was not going to attack Aleppo....BUT WAIT Assad did not attack Aleppo...it was the US supported Kurdish proxy YPG/SDF/PKK......

Just how does the Obama/Rhodes WH "spin" this bit of news?????

The @OCHA_Syria euphemism for the developing horrific 300.000+ civ pocket of eastern Aleppo.
http://aranews.net/2016/07/un-relief...r-torn-aleppo/

Outlaw 09

Fri, 07/08/2016 - 3:51pm

France and Germany claim that Iran's ballistic missiles program is violation of "nuke" deal brokered by Obama. Washington rejects claim.

Outlaw 09

Fri, 07/08/2016 - 3:58pm

The Iran Deal strengthened the regime in Iran and made its foreign policy more aggressive.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/i-used-supp...-wrong-1569480

I used to support the US-led nuclear deal with Iran – I was wrong

Iran's nuclear deal with the US and Europe has made the Middle East more divided, unstable and violent.

By Iyad el-Baghdadi July 7, 2016 15:22

Quote:

Last week I sent out a tweet about the state of the Middle East after the Iran nuclear deal, in which I argued that the agreement "has made the Middle East a more violent, unstable, and dangerous place".

The tweet – viewed over 35,000 times at the time of writing – engendered many responses, a few in support, but many in outrage: 'How can you be against an anti-war, anti-nuclear, anti-sanctions deal?' they asked. 'Do you not want peace and prosperity for the Iranian people?'

I didn't always feel this way about the Iran deal. Although I had occasional doubts, I was mostly supportive, even optimistic. I had never bought into "nuclear Iran" scare stories, considering them to be warmongering propaganda. I had never believed that the Iranian regime was close to having nuclear weapons, and that even if it had them it would ever use them.

I understood the Iranian regime's core need as a need for international legitimacy – this is a regime that was born in 1979 ringed by enemies, and almost immediately engaged in a devastating and prolonged war (with Saddam Hussein's Iraq) that sought to uproot it. The regime, I understood, needed the deal for the same reason it needed the nukes: To ensure that its existence was no longer threatened.

But I also never saw the deal to be simply about nuclear weapons vs sanctions – I consider that view rather myopic. Put in its historical and geopolitical context, the deal is about more than just the lifting of sanctions. It is about the final legitimisation of the Iranian regime and the normalisation of its relationship with the world as an acceptable and valid partner.

My optimism about the Iran deal was based upon two main reasons - the first being the potential economic and political liberalisation it would bring, and the second being the belief that it would catalyse a wider regional drive to reduce violence and war.

Economic and political reform

I thought that the momentum created by the lifting of sanctions would be used by Iran's regime reformists to push for economic and political liberalisation. Sanctions rarely change the behaviour of a committed regime and instead punish and weaken society, critically reducing its ability to push against its own regime, and hence leading to entrenchment rather than change.

I had hoped that the lifting of sanctions and the return of foreign trade could create a momentum that can lead to an "opening up" of economic and political space within Iran, allowing civil society and native reformers some breathing space.

I now see I was wrong in that hope.

Iran deal Foreign Minister Javad Zarif Palais Coburg
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif waves from the balcony of Palais Coburg, the venue for nuclear talks, in Vienna(Reuters)

Iran's regime – even its presentable faces – continue to mock those who call for human rights or political liberalisation. In this astounding clip (recorded last month in Oslo), Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif responds to a question posed by an Iranian academic with accusations of "Iranophobia".

It's almost tragicomic and reminds me of sympathisers with the Egyptian regime responding to criticism of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi's dismal human rights record with accusations of "hating Egypt".

Well – perhaps the human rights situation won't immediately improve, but maybe the renewed economic dynamism can lead to an economic liberalisation that can improve the lot of many Iranians? Unfortunately, it now looks increasingly more likely that the prime benefactors of new business contracts will be none other than Iran's Islamic Republican Guards Corps (IRGC), which control an increasing sector of Iran's economy, especially in heavy industry and infrastructure (the very industries that will probably see the first, and largest, business contracts).

The IRGC, created in 1979 to "protect the Islamic system", increased their power during Ahmadinejad's term, and helped crush Iran's Green Revolution in 2009. Their expanding role has led several Iranian friends to comment that their country seems to be gradually transitioning from a theocracy to a military dictatorship. This may seem ironic if not for historical precedents – a force established to protect a ruling establishment, ending up controlling, dominating, and overshadowing that establishment.

In short, I had initially hoped that the Iran deal would give Iran's entrepreneurs, reformists, and civil society at large more breathing space, but I now see that it's more likely that we'll see exactly the opposite, with existing powers entrenching themselves even further.

Reducing war and violence

I was also initially optimistic about the Iran deal due to my belief that it would lay the groundwork for a wider regional agreement that would reduce violence and defuse war.

Iran's regime, as I have mentioned, was under siege for most of its lifetime and regularly threatened with war or regime change. The deal removes the existential threat of a Western-led invasion, in effect giving the Iranian regime immunity against foreign-led regime change. My initial optimism was grounded in a belief that the regime's aggressive foreign policy will become far more moderate if it no longer feels existentially threatened.

Additionally, I thought that the United States would use the diplomatic momentum created by the deal to lead a regional effort to reduce tensions; primarily by getting Iran to help a Syria transition or resolution, and "rebalancing" the region through a US-led Iran-GCC détente. There were some early signs of this, with the UAE's Foreign Minister visiting Iran in late November 2013, after which there was talk about an Iran-UAE presidential summit (which unfortunately never materialised).

I now see that I was wrong about this as well. The region, post Iran deal, has become even more unstable and more violent, due to choices made by both Iran and its regional competitors, the GCC block.

We cannot be prosperous unless we are also at peace, and we deserve better than to be cannon fodder in a regional war.

Iran's foreign policy was not at all tempered by the deal – it only became more aggressive, ramping up support for Syria's Assad and with the IRGC even going to the extent of recruiting and training Afghani refugees to fight in return for asylum for their families. Simultaneously, the GCC countries felt so threatened by the Iran deal that they intensified the regional conflict in Syria, and opened a new front in Yemen.

Whether it's the Iranian regime or the GCC that are more responsible for the increased violence is debatable; but the point stands that the Iran deal contributed to an atmosphere of insecurity, instability, sectarianism and violence. It created a situation which empowered (rather than moderated) aggressive foreign policy among both Iran and the GCC. The Iran deal could have made the region better – but it ended up making it worse.

Is there a better deal?

So what is the alternative? It's commonly argued that to reject the Iran deal is tantamount to advocating war – but I reject this view. The alternative to a short-sighted deal is a better and wider deal, one that is sustainable and that stands to empower the region's societies rather than precipitating further war and empowering tyrants and terrorists.

It is of course too late, in a way – the deal has already been concluded, and the regional situation has mutated and has become far more complex since.

We can only hope that Western players – especially those that played a role in creating the region's mess – would use their diplomatic capital for a better outcome for the region's societies. I say this with bitterness, because the region's own players do not seem to be interested in de-escalation, and seem to find sectarianism the convenient and even pragmatic thing to do.

It is the average Iranian and the average Arab who will suffer the most in an atmosphere of rampant terrorism, sectarianism, and war. We cannot be prosperous unless we are also at peace, and we deserve better than to be cannon fodder in a regional war.

Outlaw 09

Fri, 07/08/2016 - 3:27pm

132 days into the"cessation of hostilities"
60 hours into a "3 day ceasefire"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PTwl4Y9mWs

No 'jihadi / FSA' shelling can justify YPG's attempt to help besiege eastern Aleppo, encircling 300.000+ civilians.

BUT WAIT.....YPG is the US supported Kurdish proxy....so why is it not fighting IS......

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/07/2016 - 6:11am

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-on-syria.html

Al Qaeda Reaps Rewards of U.S. Policy Failures on Syria

Charles Lister 6/7/2016

Unless America addresses the chaos Assad has wrought, it can’t stop the rise of jihadism in Syria.

Quote:

Warfare and diplomacy are intrinsically linked, except when it comes to the Obama administration’s policy on Syria. While a negotiated settlement remains the only viable pathway out of the Syrian crisis, currently existing facts on the ground do not in any way allow for a meaningful process, let alone a solution. As things stand, there is no reason for Bashar al-Assad to view a political process as anything less than a game in which to taunt and kill his adversaries, while compelling his allies to double-down in defense of his regime.

Nevertheless, the principal benefactor of Assad’s survival is not Assad, nor Russia, Iran, Hezbollah or even ISIS—it is Al-Qaeda. Having spent the past five years embedding itself within broader revolutionary forces and strategically choosing to limit and very slowly reveal its extremist face, Al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra is reaping the rewards of our failures to solve the Syrian crisis. According to sources close to the group, al-Nusra has accepted more than 3,000 Syrians from Idlib and southern Aleppo into its ranks since February alone. That is an extraordinary rate of recruitment from within a territory roughly the size of Connecticut.

It is desperately unfortunate and painfully ironic that for increasing numbers of Syrians, Al-Qaeda appears to have been a more loyal protector of their lives than the United States. Civilian protection is therefore key, and widespread perceptions of the moral bankruptcy of U.S. policy on Syria in this regard has unquestionably and directly stimulated Al-Qaeda’s growth. Even our fight against ISIS has provided an opening for Al-Qaeda, which exploits the fact that most of our chosen anti-ISIS partners maintain an ambiguous relationship to the Assad regime and an open one with Russia. Our fight against the scourge of ISIS is indeed securing us consistent gains, but these are tactical gains fought in such a way as to produce long-term secondary sources of instability that Al-Qaeda will chiefly exploit.

Enough is enough. It is not sufficient to wait for a new administration in 2017. Events are unfolding too quickly and ISIS is far from the only issue needing urgent resolution. Based on its current trajectory, the conflict in Syria will almost certainly continue and indeed worsen, lasting for a decade or more. Extremists on all sides will benefit the most, meaning we will face an Afghanistan on steroids, on Europe’s borders. ISIS may be defeated territorially in the near-term, but it will live to fight another day. Al-Qaeda meanwhile may come to represent a terrorist actor far more intelligent, more deeply rooted and offensively capable than anything we have faced until now.

While it remains feasible to defeat ISIS in Syria independently from attempts to solve the country’s broader crisis, Al-Qaeda’s fate is intrinsically linked to the conflict’s outcome and how it ends. Moreover, unlike ISIS, undermining and ultimately defeating Al-Qaeda in Syria cannot and should not be done primarily through military means. Russia has consistently pushed for a bilateral campaign against Jabhat al-Nusra alongside the U.S. Air Force and though this is still some way off from being realized, it is being actively considered by President Obama. Far from being helpful, this is precisely the wrong thing to do. Jabhat al-Nusra’s entire modus operandi has been designed to insure itself and ultimately benefit from just such a scenario.

At the end of the day, Al-Qaeda has increasingly thrived in Syria due in part to two realities: consistent conflict, instability and the regime’s unchallenged mass killing of civilians; and an insufficiently supported mainstream, moderate civil, political and armed opposition. If and when reversed, these two factors could come to represent Al-Qaeda’s greatest and likely crippling vulnerabilities.

To challenge the first reality, the U.S. has an opportunity to grasp back some credibility by prioritizing a determined and if necessary, aggressive protection of civilians. Whether through the creation of limited ‘safe’ or ‘no-bombing’ zones along border areas, or through the use of punitive strikes to punish the bombing of civilian, humanitarian or medical facilities, the U.S. must demonstrate a willingness to draw more discernibly upon its might to punish war crimes. An escalatory menu of ‘softer’ options—expanded sanctions, naval interdictions in the Mediterranean, or challenging Syria’s role within the UN General Assembly—could be considered prior to military action, although these take time, which we do not necessarily have.

While military action does indeed carry with it risks, pre-warning Moscow of such plans would minimize any chance of counter-escalation, while realistically, Russia has absolutely no interest in, nor a capacity for entering into a war with America. It is long past time to call Vladimir Putin’s bluff. After all, beyond its aggressive military actions in Syria, Russia’s biggest investment has arguably been in exploiting its bilateral relationship with the U.S. in an attempt to acquire an outward appearance as a ‘constructive partner’ in solving Syria. Russia will not be shooting down American jets or cruise missiles anytime soon, especially if our targets are non-critical regime infrastructure.

Consequently, by using civilian protection as a mechanism for limited and targeted aerial intervention, the U.S. would simultaneously contribute towards saving human lives; de-escalating the most deadly aspect of Syria’s conflict and providing a more stable environment in which the moderate civil opposition could thrive. Most importantly, the Assad regime will lose its principal source of escalation, while its backers will face less reason to stand so aggressively by his side. Paired with hard diplomacy, such conditions would be at least more potentially favorable to lead towards meaningful negotiations. In September 2013, merely the threat of limited punitive U.S. strikes sparked a temporary collapse of regime confidence in Damascus, as dozens of figures fled to Beirut with their families. It is by no means unthinkable that a similar situation could be replicated.

To challenge the second reality, the U.S. must acknowledge that while the vetted opposition is far from perfect, they remain the best and only viable option on the table for securing a mainstream Sunni Arab role in Syria’s future and undermining Al-Qaeda’s pseudo-revolutionary narrative. There are currently at least 50 such vetted opposition factions across Syria, who have received assistance through the CIA’s covert ‘Timber Sycamore’ program since late-2012. Such assistance has only ever been enough for each faction to sustain a role within Syria’s complex conflict dynamics. That it has never been sufficient enough to produce genuine moderate opposition dominance is exactly what has allowed Al-Qaeda to step in so strongly. To continue our current policy of providing ‘just-enough’ support to the vetted moderate opposition means nothing short of indirectly enabling Al-Qaeda’s continued growth.

This must change. While weaker than some conservative Islamists, all 50 vetted opposition factions remain deeply rooted within the exact Syrian communities we need most to reject extremist alternatives. Using external force to combat Al-Qaeda will feed the jihadist group’s existing narrative, as occurred in late-2014 when U.S. strikes against its forces were quickly labelled by the opposition as “counter-revolutionary” for they served only to weaken opposition lines against the regime. Allowing Assad and his external backers to take the fight to Al-Qaeda would likely have even worse mobilizing effects. The only solution is local and the mainstream, moderate opposition is the only game in town. But the only feasible scenario in which such forces can and would take on their long-time military ally of convenience is if we appeared more assertively ‘on-side’ in challenging the Assad regime’s continued brutality and obduracy in the face of an internationally-backed political process.

Al-Qaeda is not a problem that can be merely contained in Syria. At its current rate of growth, it could feasibly command close to 20,000 fighters by the time a new President steps into the Oval Office. Moreover, the establishment of an Islamic Emirate in northwestern Syria is now very much on the cards. Its creation will bring the initiation of complex and centralized foreign attack planning, from Europe’s doorstep. Letting Syria burn itself out while trying to contain its consequences is not only a fantastical policy, but an astonishingly dangerous one.

Nevertheless, the principal benefactor of Assad’s survival is not Assad, nor Russia, Iran, Hezbollah or even ISIS—it is Al-Qaeda.

Continued....

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/07/2016 - 12:59pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Angela Merkel attacks Iranian regime: "Iran violates resolutions of UNSC and continues ballistic missile program."

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/07/2016 - 12:59pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Angela Merkel attacks Iranian regime: "Iran violates resolutions of UNSC and continues ballistic missile program."

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/07/2016 - 12:59pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Angela Merkel attacks Iranian regime: "Iran violates resolutions of UNSC and continues ballistic missile program."

Outlaw 09

Thu, 07/07/2016 - 5:47am

Ever wonder what those Obama/Rhodes WH "moderate Iranians are up to these days"?????

How about that? Iran's already-high level activities to procure nuclear and missile technology got even higher.

In German.....German Defense of the Constitution Agency equal to say the British MI5.....clearly stated Iran still wants their nuclear bomb.....

http://m.bild.de/politik/ausland/atomprogramm-iran/verfassungsschutz-wa…