Week Ten of the Russian Intervention in Syria
The “Assad Must Go” Policy Implies War With Russia, Iran and
Hezbollah
The Saker
December 15, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "Unz
Review"
- The “news” that Israel and Turkey are systematically violating
international law is hardly news at all. After all, we all know that
Turkey has been regularly bombing the Kurds in Iraq and Syria, that
Turkey still illegally occupies northern Cyprus just like the
Israelis have been bombing Syria and Lebanon for decades and that
they are still illegally occupying Palestine. The interesting
development this week is that France, the UK and Germany have all
officially decided to join these rogue states and act just like the
Turks and Israelis by illegally intervening in Syria – in direct
violation of international law – supposedly to fight Daesh. And even
though Daesh is the official enemy, it “just so happens” that
Syrian army positions were bombed by the USAF while the Israelis
bombed Hezbollah missile depots. Apparently, the “Assad must go”
policy is still the order of the day. In a way, one could argue that
the West has now (re-)affirmed the principle that “might makes
right” and that threats and violence are still the only “policy” of
the Empire in lieu of a legal, negotiated, policy. The
problem with that is that the “other side” strongly feels that
surrendering to the Empire’s demands is simply not an option.
The Russian warning:
In reality this has been going on for years. From
the decision to bomb Serbia to the recent decision by the IMF to
bail out the Ukraine in direct violation of IMF rules (which,
apparently, shall now be re-written), the AngloZionist Empire has
now been violating its own so-called “rules” and “principles” for
decades against the background of a quasi-general indifference to
the end of the international world order agreed upon after WWII. The big difference today is that the Empire’s reckless arrogance
has now brought it in direct contact with the Russian Armed Forces
which, apparently, are not willing to accept that kind of thuggery
and who will fight back if attacked: in his annual address to
expanded meeting of the Russian Federation Defense Ministry Board
Putin has clearly indicated that the fact that Russia chose not to
strike back at Turkey was a one time exception saying:
I want to warn those who might again try to
organize any kind of provocation against our troops: we have
taken additional measures to ensure the security of Russian
troops and air base. It is reinforced by new air force squadrons
and air defenses. All our strike aircraft are now flying with
fighter cover. I order you to act with very extreme resolve. Any
targets that threaten Russia’s group or our terrestrial
infrastructure are to be immediately destroyed.
What Putin is doing here is warning Turkey and,
really all of NATO and the Empire that next time Russia will shoot
back, immediately. This also shows that the authority shoot
back has now been given to the Russian forces in Syria and that no
top-level decision will have to be requested to return fire.
It is true that this is not a first.
The RAF was also given similar order in October already, but
since the notion of antiquated Tornados shooting down a SU-30SM is
rather far fetched (even if the British press insist that their
1970s-era aircraft “are capable of blasting any aircraft out of the
sky”), the capability of the SU-30SMs and even the SU-34s to shoot
down Western 4th generation aircraft is not in doubt. The
Russians have the resolve and the means.
But will the West take the Russian warnings
seriously?
The Israeli counter example:
The contrast between the NATO countries and Israel
could, in this case, not be bigger. Bibi Netanyahu, by far the most
intelligent actor in the AngloZionist Empire, immediately traveled
to Moscow to sit down with his Russian counterparts to hammer out
some kind of deal which would allow the Russians and Israelis to
pursue their objectives without risking a shootout. When the first
Russian Air Force incursion into the Israeli airspace occurred the
Israelis handled it as a completely harmless event. Israeli Defense
Minister Ya’alon
declared:
“There was a slight intrusion a mile (1.6
kilometers) deep by a Russian plane from Syria into our
airspace, but it was immediately resolved and the Russian plane
returned towards Syria. It was apparently an error by the pilot
who was flying near the Golan. Russian planes do not intend to
attack us, which is why we must not automatically react and
shoot them down when an error occurs”.
Later, an Ya’alon aide, General (res.) Amos Gilad,
stated at a weekly event in Tel Aviv that Russian planes have
occasionally crossed into Israeli airspace – but that the “very
close cooperation between Russia and Israel” vis-a-vis operations in
and around Syria had prevented any misunderstandings.
The counterpart on Russia side was just as
obvious, if not officially admitted: when the Israelis bombed a
Hezbollah weapons depot near Damascus the Russians “looked the other
way”. Considering that almost at the same time Hezbollah operatives
were risking their lives to rescue a downed Russian airman, this
kind of deal is of less than exemplary morality, but Hezbollah
people are also realists: just look at the way they put up with
Assad even while he was torturing people for the CIA (the infamous
“rendition” program) or when Imad Mughniyeh was murdered with
obvious complicity of high-ranking members of the Assad regime). The
leaders of Hezbollah understand what is happening here: like it or
not, but Russia and Israel do have a “special relationship” which,
while hardly a love fest, does include a unique combination of hard
realism, often bordering on cynicism, and a mutual recognition that
neither side wants an overt conflict. In this case, the Israelis
were told in no uncertain terms that the Russian intervention to
save the Syria from Daesh was not negotiable, but that Russia
does not intend to protect Hezbollah from Israeli actions as long as
these actions do not threaten the Russian objectives in Syria.
Being a realist, Netanyahu took the deal.
Though there was some confusion about this, it is
my understanding that while the Russians have deployed the S-400 in
Syria, there is also some evidence that the Syrians were finally
given at least some S-300 batteries and
that they might have used them against the Israelis on at least one
occasion. What is absolutely certain is that under international
law the Syrians will have the right to shoot at any US, French,
German, Turkish or other aircraft flying in Syrian airspace and that
if that happens the countries in violation of international law will
not have a legitimate self-defense argument to make. By extension,
this also means that Russia does also have the right to shoot down
any aircraft or land or sea based weapons system targeting Russian
aircraft. Unfortunately, western politicians and propagandists (aka
“journalists”) are going to extraordinary lengths to avoid ever even
mentioning these facts. And if somebody dares to actually ask the
right question, western officials have a fit. This is exactly what
happened recently between RT reporter Gayane Chichakyan and State
Department spokesman John Kirby. See for yourself:
The Iranian warning:
Russia is not the only country which has been
repeatedly warning the West about the dangers of remaining stuck in
a “Assad must go” policy: Iran has also repeated such warnings. The
latest one came directly from the foreign policy advisor to the
leader of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, Ali Akbar Velayati, who
openly stated that Bashar al-Assad is Syria’s lawful president
and that “Iran considers him as its redline”. Velayati also
said that “only Syrian people, who elected Assad, are entitled to
decide the future of their country (…) and no foreign country
will be allowed to interfere in Syria’s internal affairs”.
Furthermore, another senior Iranian official, Iran’s Parliamentary
Speaker Ali Larijani,
said that “Russia does not need prior agreement to use
Iranian airspace to bomb sites in Syria” – in other words, such
an agreement has already been negotiated. Considering that
Larijani and Velayati are amongst the most influential and
authoritative officials in Iran, one can only conclude that the
Iranians are openly declaring that they are fully backing the
Russian efforts in Syria. And that, in turn, means that Iran
will send as many “boots on the ground” as needed to prevent Daesh
from taking Damascus. This is the other crucial factor which
the West is desperately trying not to think about.
The western narrative currently tries to show that
it is Russia (and only Russia) which is keeping Assad in power. But
this is completely false. The reality is that both Hezbollah and
Iran are fully committed to preventing Daesh from overthrowing the
Syrian government and their commitment has gone way further than
words: Hezbollah has send hundreds of its best fighters to Syria and
Iran has committed thousands of soldiers, mostly of the al-Quds
Brigade, to the war in Syria. What this level of determination shows
is that, just like Russia, Iran and Hezbollah have concluded that
their vital, existential, interests are at risk and that they have
no choice than to take the fight to Daesh. I believe that this
assessment is absolutely correct.
So this is the key question here: do the deep
state elites which run the US Empire understand that neither Russia,
nor Iran or Hezbollah believe that they can back down and accept a
Daesh victory in Syria? Do the western leader realize that Russia,
Iran and Hezbollah cannot let the Empire overthrow
Assad? Is there anybody out there who does not realize that
the “Assad must go policy” implies a war against Russia, Iran and
Hezbollah? The only way to avoid a war is to finally give
up, even if that is initially denied publicly, on the “Assad must
go” policy.
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)