HIGH-STAKES GAME OVER SYRIA AS KHAMENEI-PUTIN AXIS ADVANCES

The news out of Syria this week is, as usual, complex—and seemingly contradictory.

On the one hand, the Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hizballah alliance appeared to have overcome rebel resistance in Aleppo—a major turning point that would shift the war’s momentum in the alliance’s favor.

On the other hand, Arab and other media reported that on Wednesday the Israeli air force struck a Syrian weapons depot west of Damascus and a weapons convoy headed for Hizballah in Lebanon.

As of Thursday evening there had been no retaliation against Israel, and Israeli analysts generally saw a retaliation as unlikely.

Media outside of Israel have, of course, often reported in the past on Israeli airstrikes—usually against Hizballah-bound weaponry—in Syria.

Israel’s policy has been to keep mum, neither denying nor confirming the reports. Last April, though, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acknowledged that Israel had carried out “dozens” of strikes in Syria against “game-changing weaponry” for Hizballah.

It’s no secret that, since the 2006 war between Israel and Hizballah in Lebanon, Hizballah has massively rearmed and now harbors tens of thousands of missiles. But Israel regards some kinds of weapons—precision rockets, advanced antiship and antiaircraft systems—as out of bounds for the terror group.

What has changed in the Syrian arena, though, is that late last year Russia deployed its powerful S-400 radar and antiaircraft system there. It covers Syria, Lebanon, and much of Israel and can track Israel’s northern airspace.

Since then there have been far fewer reported Israeli airstrikes in Syria. In one of them, last September, the outcome seemed ominous when Syria—not a military match for Israel by itself, but backed by Russia and Iran—fired missiles at two Israeli aircraft.

Why, then, the Israeli strike this week? Why no military response this time?

One conjecture: the weapons Israel struck in the Syrian depot and in the convoy would have been particularly unacceptable weapons in Hizballah’s hands.

Another conjecture: the much-touted Israeli-Russian coordination, whereby Netanyahu and Russian president Vladimir Putin are said to have worked out arrangements to avoid clashes, is still operative.

Other possible mitigating factors are that Israel reportedly hit the targets from Lebanese, not Syrian, airspace, and that no Syrian or Hizballah fighters appear to have been killed.

The larger question: what happens if Syria’s Assad and his backers have indeed turned the tide and will be looking to keep extending their control over Syrian territory?

Of interest here are remarks to the Algemeiner website by Yossi Kuperwasser, who has held major positions in Israel’s Military Intelligence.

Kuperwasser, as the site paraphrases it, says that

Iran is stepping up the speed at which it is arming its proxies in the region due to its fear that after Donald Trump assumes the US presidency in January, its room to maneuver in Syria will be greatly hampered….

And regarding Israel and Russia, in Kuperwasser’s own words:

There is a mutual understanding of each other’s interests. Though Russia and Iran are backing Hezbollah combat rebel forces fighting against the Assad regime, Russia understands that Israel cannot allow weapons from Hezbollah in Syria to be moved to Lebanon, where they will be aimed at the Jewish state.

How long can this relatively tolerable—for Israel—situation continue?

Indications are that its days may be numbered. Even if Putin’s strategic goals are not identical to those of his allies—he is clearly not a Shiite ideologue like the Iranians and Hizballah or a Shiite-aligned Arab like Assad—his steps have been increasingly brazen.

Along with the transfer of major weapon systems to Syria, and an aircraft carrier to its coast, they include major weapons sales to Iran, joint provision with Iran of weapons to Iran’s Houthi proxies in Yemen, and reports of Russian aid to Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq.

As Kuperwasser puts it, Israel’s most serious concern is “Iran’s increasing territorial contiguity—crossing Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.”

For the incoming Trump administration, stemming this tide should be an urgent priority. Whatever Putin’s real motive, he is helping create a situation of unacceptable danger to Israel and a Middle East bifurcated between Shiite and Sunni blocs—a recipe for ongoing war and explosive instability.

Originally Published on FrontpageMag

[huge_it_share]

War Drums: Russia Threatens Ukraine Over Provocations on the Crimean Border

It has been reported that Moscow directly threatened Ukraine with missile attacks if the Ukrainian government goes through with its planned missile test on the Crimean border. Unnamed sources in Ukraine have told local Ukrainian newspapers that they received a letter from Russia’s Defense Ministry effectively threatening Ukraine with a direct military response if Ukraine goes through with its planned missile test.

Ukraine has denied it plans on testing any missiles near Russia. However, Russia is clear that it stands ready to not only shoot down the missiles, but retaliate against Ukraine directly. When asked if Russia really will retaliate Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, “The Kremlin would like Ukraine to refrain from violating international law and creating unsafe conditions for international flights over Russia.”

Is This For Real?

If the Russian aviation watchdog Rosaviatsia can be believed then yes, there is set to be a Ukrainian missile test after Dec. 1st. Rosaviatsia insists that Ukraine had unilaterally decided in violation of all international treaties to hold missile launches in Russia’s sovereign airspace near Crimea, in the area of civil and government planes’ routes, on December 1-2. If this goes through then expect Putin to finally go through with his plans to take a large chunk of eastern Ukraine as well as pick off targets with his S-300 and S-400 he placed there.

The Romney Factor

The assumption was that Donald Trump would be amicable to Russian interests. Yet, we see that his courtship of Mitt Romney and General Mattis means just the opposite.  Putin knows he may very well have been thrown off by betting on an easy relationship with the Donald.  He now seems to be on the move just in case he gets a far tougher hand than he thought after January 20th.

So, if the Ukrainians decide to go ahead with the test, buckle up, because Eastern Europe will be headed to war.

[huge_it_share]

 

BREAKING NEWS: Israel Attacks Multiple Targets in Syria

Although the IDF has no official comment on the air force raids into Syrian territory. Arabic media is reporting Israeli airstrikes on multiple targets.

London-based Rai al-Youm stated the following on it’s website:

“The Israeli air force launched two raids by 4 missiles. The first targeted an ammunition dump inside the 38 Brigade of the Fourth Infantry Division, in the Syrian army and sources said the second targeted a number of cars near highway between Beirut – Damascus. The sources said the second raid was not targeting any security or political personnel, but rather a convoy of vehicles who are mostly likely affiliated with Hezbollah arms shipments.  According to local media the attack occurred in the early hours of Wednesday morning with Syrians waking to hear the sound of explosions west of the Syrian capital Damascus.”

The attack follows a similar attack against ISIS targets after they engaged with the IDF on Monday.  The Israeli government continues to follow a policy of neutrality in regards to the Syrian Civil War and will only attack when arm shipments are destined from Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon or if ISIS directly confronts Israel, which happened for the first time earlier in the week.

[huge_it_share]

 

 

BREAKING NEWS: First Direct Battle Between Israel and ISIS on the Golan

In what is being billed as the first direct clash between Israel and ISIS, the Shuhada al-Yarmouk organization, which has pledged allegiance to ISIS, lost a number of fighters after exchanging fire with the IDF. The terror organization fired on IDF soldiers and after an exchange of gunfire, Israel’s airforce destroyed the gunman’s vehicle, killing all of the assailants.

The escalation, although minor in scope presents the first time affiliates of ISIS entered into a direct confrontation with Israel.  Either this was a trial balloon or the collapsing caliphate has decided to open a front against Israel. Given the fact that it is strethced thin due to increasing Russian bombardments and Srian government forces pushing back its fighters, it would be strange that it would want to waste fighters on a much more formidable Israeli arm.

Then again, Israel is a perfect target to distract from ISIS’s weakening position. By attacking Israel it may be able to rally the Sunni street to its side.

One senior officer stated: “We don’t know all the outcomes of the event. There is great probability there are four dead and the heavy machine gun was destroyed. The terrorists are from Shuhada al-Yarmouk, with all the significance that organization’s name carries. The Israeli forces didn’t lie in ambush by chance.”

The Israeli government wasted no time showcasing the incident and the army’s response.

Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu said, “I want to commend our soldiers who pushed back against the attack carried out against us. We are prepared against any enemy that threatens us on our northern border, and do not give ISIS a foothold for their war in Syria.”

Will Shuhada al-Yarmouk attack again? Was this is a test ballon? It is too early to give a clear answer to these questions. However, one thing is for sure, ISIS is not going to sit back and be destroyed nor will it be wished away as if it is the bogey man. Sooner or later as Syria continues to sprial out of control, Israel will have to root out and defeat ISIS with or without intenational help.

 

Trump and the Ayatollah: Who Will Flinch First?

There is less than 60 days until Donald Trump becomes the 45th President of the United States of America and the Ayatollah has already threatened the United States with retaliation due to the House of Representatives renewing the Iran Sanctions Act for 10 years.  Given the fact that this act was not actually part of the final agreement between the Obama Administration and Iran, it is hard to understand why the Ayatollah is so bent out of shape.

To understand why Iran is already making threatening gestures one must look into how far-reaching the shift will be in America’s foreign policy after Jan. 20th.  Let’s assume for a second that the worst happens and Mitt Romney is selected as Secretary of State.  Even Romney is fully opposed to the Iran deal and believes America should take down the Ayatollahs.  It’s true that Romney is equally antagonistic towards Russia, but isolating the Iran policy by itself and considering this is the best they can hope for, the Persian predicament is still pretty bad.  Now let’s assume Trump goes with a Bolton or Rudy Gulliani, then Iran will be looking down the barrel of a gun.

Given Donald Trump’s view of the world, where Russia becomes a force to be dealt with directly then the bad actor is none other than Iran, exactly the way it is now. For the Donald everyone else is rightfully just trying to do the best for their country (save for Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and a few others) and so in a simple, but realistic way those countries that cannot abide by any deal are bad actors meant to be isolated.

Iran is ratcheting up the pressure now in order to make it clear to the new President that it must be taken seriously and all agreements be adhered to. With General Flynn acting as Donald Trump’s National Security Adviser, Nikki Haley now the Ambassador to be at the UN, and a Secretary of State that would love to see a hard-line drawn on the Mullah’s, Iran has little chance to convince Donald Trump to back down.

The only question is, what will Iran do when there is no deal to hold them to?

[huge_it_share]

War Drums: The Fire Intifada is Only the Beginning, Hezbollah is Next

As more fires are set around Israel and the nation’s emergency response is stretched to its max, the next phase in what is fast becoming and orchestrated series of events is likely to happen. It has been understood for a while now that Hezbollah and their Iranian sponsors would launch counter measures in Northern Israel.  With Trump set to take over in a matter of weeks and Putin trying to keep balance between Israel and Iran, the window of opportunity for an actual attack is closing.

Using the fires to cripple Israeli infrastructure, especially in Haifa where large chemical plants exist is a set up for what Iran and Hezbollah plans to do next.  Expect Hezbollah infiltrators with the help of the same groups that are setting fires to penetrate Israel’s Northern border and carve out an area.  Reaction will be swift from Israel, but it will spark a far wider conflict in the waining days of Obama’s presidency.  Given Putin’s role behind the scenes he maybe forced to play peacemaker.

The goal is not to win, but to bring Israel to its knees.  So far Israel’s enemies are winning.

“We Are Coming Nineveh” Obama Must Win in Mosul or Donald Trump Will Do it For Him

Legacies are bitter weapons that plague outgoing presidents time and time again.  Barack Obama thought he had his legacy wrapped up, but then came the blue color workers and placed Donald Trump into office. With one election Obama’s legacy is in tatters and he knows it.  Despite all of that, there is one last battle Obama needs and wants to win to stave off a complete rejection of his so far disastrous foreign policy. This battle is the battle of Mosul, where ISIS is making there last stand as far as nation building is going.

Despite a bitter beginning of infighting between Shiite militias, Turkish troops, Kurdish Peshmerga, and Iraqi National forces, the operation according the Iraqi officials is beginning to move along. “We Are Coming Nineveh”  has a time limit though and that is Jan. 20th.  Right now Obama has kept the Russians out of the bombing campaign and wants to prove he doesn’t need them to finish the job.  If Mosul is not taken by inauguration day, Trump will surely bring the Russians in to crush ISIS once and for all.

Why does this matter?

Obama has staked his foreign policy at least in the waning years of his Presidency on holding off Russian expansion.  Of course Putin has bested him in Eastern Europe as well as Syria.  This means Obama must keep him out of Iraq or risk being seen as a total loser. With Mosul grinding on and 60 days until President-Elect Trump becomes President Trump, the odds are not great that the Iraqi forces will succeed.  Keep in mind ISIS could have been defeated a while ago, but each side fighting in Iraq has used the group as a pawn to offset what they see as a more mortal enemy.

This is why Trump’s approach is to ignore the game on the ground and get together with Putin and flatten ISIS and if need be others.

Jan. 20th is coming.  After that date Iraq and Operation “We Are Coming Nineveh”  are on the chopping block.

[huge_it_share]

What Will Replace ISIS?

Originally published on Sultan Knish.

Before long the same administration that declared the fighting in Iraq over several times will claim victory over ISIS. The timetable for its push against the Islamic State appears to have less do with the victimized Christians and Yazidis who have been prevented from coming here as refugees in favor of Syrian Muslims than with the Clinton presidential campaign. Like Obama’s declarations that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were over, the announcement that ISIS has been defeated will be premature.

It is based on a profound misunderstanding and misreading of Islamic terrorism.

Long before its current string of defeats, ISIS had begun evolving into another Al Qaeda; a multinational alliance of Jihadists scattered around the world. Bombing Mosul isn’t hard, but try bombing Marseille, Brussels or London. There is no doubt that the ability of ISIS to temporarily establish a caliphate allowed it to build a network that could carry out terror attacks from New York to Miami to Nice to Munich. But it would be dangerous to assume that losing Iraq and Syria will stop ISIS.

ISIS doesn’t matter. The idea of ISIS does. And the idea of ISIS is Islamic supremacism.

The organization we think of ISIS has transformed and rebranded countless times. Even now our leaders vacillate between calling it ISIS, ISIL or, more childishly, Daesh, while it dubs itself the Islamic State. We have been fighting it in one form or another for over a decade. It would be unrealistically optimistic to assume that the war will end just as this old enemy has shown its ability to strike deep in our own cities.

The bigger error though is to think that we are fighting an organization. We are fighting an idea. That is not to contend, as Obama does, that we can debate it to death. It is not the sort of idea that argues with words, but with bullets, bombs and swords. But neither does it just go away if you seize a city.

Al Qaeda in Iraq not only survived the death of Zarqawi, but it became even more dangerous under Baghdadi. It would be risky to assume that ISIS will die with him. Instead it may very well grow into a new phase of Al Qaeda, one that ties together some of the world’s deadliest Islamic terror groups into a network that is decentralized enough that it will not suffer from Al Qaeda’s leadership fatigue.

The rise of Islamic terrorism has been an incremental process in which new groups learn from the mistakes of the old and supersede them. If ISIS does recede into a localized oblivion, reemerging only on occasion to suicide bomb something or someone in Baghdad, then a deadlier and even more effective group is likely to take its place. Each group will move one step closer to realizing the caliphate.

To break the cycle, we must confront the idea of the caliphate at the heart of Islamic terrorism.

ISIS is not un-Islamic. It is ruthlessly and uncompromisingly Islamic in that, unlike its predecessors in the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda, it makes the fewest compromises to civilizational sensibilities. Its goals are the same as those of every Islamic political organization, including those dubbed moderate. It seeks to restore and enforce an Islamic system in every part of the Muslim world before moving on to conquer and subjugate the non-Muslim world. If this were merely some fringe belief held by a tiny minority of extremists, then it could be bombed to pieces in some Syrian or Iraqi backwater.

But it’s the driving force of Islam. That’s why it won’t go away. No amount of appeasement will banish it.

Taking in more Muslim settlers, pressuring Israel and letting the Muslim Brotherhood colonize our foreign policy won’t do it. We’ve tried it and it actually makes Islamic terrorism much worse.

When the announcement is made, the usual suspects will pat themselves on the back for having defeated ISIS by mobilizing a Muslim coalition. But it wasn’t Obama who mobilized a Muslim coalition. The coalition, such as it was, mobilized them. Obama provided useful support to Islamic state sponsors of terror, such as Iran and Turkey, assorted Islamic Jihadists on the ground, some blatantly associated with Sunni and Shiite terror groups in their internal Jihadist conflict with ISIS over who will fight us.

The “allies” we are aiding today will be the ones bombing us tomorrow.

And that is why claiming credit for beating ISIS accomplishes nothing. ISIS is an expression of an Islamic impulse encoded in the Koran. Islamic groups differ in the tactical expression of that impulse. ISIS was nastier and uglier than most of the Islamic terror groups we had dealt with before this. Though even it found its Boko Haram affiliate in Nigeria occasionally a little too much to stomach.

If ISIS vanishes from the world stage, Islamic terrorism will be easier to dismiss. Or so the thinking goes. The Islamic State was better at viral videos than the media that tried to whitewash Islamic terror. It was hard to ignore. But a scattering of Islamic terror groups around the world will be forgotten by the public.

History suggests that’s wishful thinking.

Islamic terrorism has shown no signs of receding. Growing Muslim populations, both at home and in Muslim settlements in the West, and the increase in travel and communications, the infrastructure of globalism, spread it from the most backward to the most advanced parts of the world. Wealthy and unstable Muslim countries, rich in oil but poor in power, finance its spread through mosques and guns.

These are the ingredients that give us ISIS or any other combination or letters that stands for Islamic terror. To do anything meaningful about it, we would have to reverse the decline of the West.

Islam originally spread into a vacuum created by civilizational decline. Civilizational decline is why it is rising once again. An obscure local terror group eventually turned into ISIS by filling a power vacuum. Even as Obama performs another touchdown dance, some other group will be making that same journey. Its mission will be the familiar one of replacing our civilization with its own.

Until we come to terms with this civilizational struggle, we will go on fighting endless wars in the sand and coping with endless terror attacks in our own cities because we have failed to recognize the nature of the enemy. We are not fighting an acronym, whether it’s ISIS or ISIL; we are fighting an Islamic State.

This is a war to determine whether the future will belong to the West or to Islam.

[huge_it_share]

lev-haolam-international-pressure

Britain Mobilizes Against Russia

As tensions continue to rise between Russia and the West, Great Britain is moving 800 troops and tanks to the Russian border with Estonia.  Although the numbers seem small, they are in fact the largest NATO deployment since the Cold War. As Putin continues to assert his influence in Eastern Ukraine and the Syrian conflict places both super powers on opposite sides of the war, the chances for direct conflict between Russia and the USA increase daily.

The real question is what kind of deployment and why is Britain making it now.  Observers know  Putin is paranoid about NATO’s continued expansion and for good reason.  Eastern Europe has always been seen as falling into the Russian sphere of influence.  With Ukraine being the Russian line in the sand, Britain and other NATO members are making sure Putin won’t use Estonia as another front. Yet, there may be another reason altogether.  NATO knows war is coming as does Russia, yet neither one wants to be blamed for being the belligerent party.  Placing troops in Estonia could be NATO’s way of baiting Putin to make his first move.

Whether a plan for more or just defending the rest of Europe, Britain’s deployment is a sign that things are not going to calm down anytime soon.

“Black Sea a Russian Lake”

To the South, the Black Sea has virtually been taken over by Russia with Turkey even calling it a Russian lake. Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey are busy putting together a plan to increase naval and air patrols in the area, as well as a multinational NATO brigade in Romania.

With Russia pulling out of international nuclear treaties 2 onths ago and moving nuclear missiles forward to its border, the West has been left to scramble to try putting togther a coherent policy. Without clear American leadership it is assumed that Russia will continue to dominate the region and keep its global influence growing.

[huge_it_share]

Break the BDS

The Coming War Maybe the Last

With a resurgent Putin and ascending China one wonders how the global structure that has existed since the end of the Cold War will continue to exist.  Most people view events through a lens of national interests mixed with political bravado.  These cross interests usually line up.  Due to this alignment we rarely have the disconnect we currently have in the West.  During the Cold War, anti-Soviet sentiment coincided with both the political and economic needs of the West’s establishment and everyday person.

No one in Washington or Brussels imagined a world where both Russia and China would reemerge as serious challengers to the West’s financial and geopolitical control, yet this is precisely what has happened. With Putin on the move in the Middle East and Eastern Europe and countries like the Philippines changing sides to China, the elite in the West have begun to panic. This is the cause of Hillary’s break with Obama’s policy when it comes to these new rising powers.

Goldman Sachs Speeches are Key to the Coming Confrontation 

Hillary is bought and sold by the banks. Her speeches make it clear she works for them and is essentially their pupet in the White House. Like always wars are far more about economy and financial control than anything else.  True there is an element ideology or nationalism at play, but choosing confrontation rarely has to do with that.  Hillary and her backers see Russia and China as a serious threat for their continuing monopoly on global finance.

With this at play, the interests of main street and the elite diverge drastically. Most Americans don’t care about Russian moves in the Middle East or Eastern Europe.  This is why Trump’s foreign policy is attractive. However, Trump is not the President whether or not he wins may not stave off a major confrontation between the USA/EU/Britain and Russia/China.

The financials in the West see a direct confrontation now, even at risk of full-blown WW3 levels rather than a proxy war as better to make sure their control stays in tact. Putin is not waiting either and this makes the “Great Game” far more dangerous than ever. For Putin and even China they understand the West is not going to let them steam roll their new world order.

When Will This Happen?

If Tump pulls an upset and wins, look for Obama to push towards an open confrontation now.  If Hillary wins, Putin will want to move fast in order to throw her foreign policy off before she gets in office.  The war will start, but on Putin’s time-table.  Either way, the stakes are so high this next war maybe the world’s last.

[huge_it_share]

Break the BDS