I just watched the short press conference given today in Washington DC by U.S. Secretary of State Kerry, Secretary of Defense Hagel, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov and Russian Defense Minister Shoigu and I wondered what could come of that meeting. The good news is that all of these men are experienced and smart politicians (compared to Hillary Kerry is simply a genius). Furthermore, I doubt that these four would have agreed to sit down and negotiate together in such a powerful format (2+2) if there was clearly nothing to negotiate to begin with. After all, these are all really powerful and busy folks and not politicians running in some silly campaign. So the fact that they got together is, in itself, definitely a positive and encouraging sign.
The bad news is that that accursed US Congress and the various lobbies running it (Israel of course, but also quite a few others) have truly outdone themselves in trying to vitiate the atmosphere between Russia and the US. Senile imbeciles like McCain or Bolton have basically convinced a good chunk of the US public opinion and press that any deal with Russia, no matter its scope or nature, is a sign of weakness if not an outright surrender to “that evil KGB agent Putin”. All the US hysterics about Snowden really only make sense in this context as in a normal non-ideological pragmatic world the entire Snowden saga would be “page 3 news” and not something to be discussed at a Ministerial or Presidential level.
Obama, Kerry and Hagel understand all that, but they are still willing to sit down with Lavrov and Hegel and this, I think, could indicate one of two things: either they are willing to press ahead regardless of the russophobic hysteria of the Republicans and Neocons, or they are looking for some kind of secret deal which both sides could deny.
Let me say immediately here that I am quite confident that the recent trip to Moscow by the Saudi intelligence Chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan was a complete failure. Bandar tried to buy off Putin and it failed. Predictable as this move was, I cannot blame the Saudis or the Americans for at least trying. And, at least, the Americans got their Saudi poodle to present this humiliating offer on their behalf. But now that this Kindergarten-level “diplomacy” is over, the real stuff must be tackled.
What is unclear to me is whether Putin at this moment in time feels powerful enough to being tightening some screws on the Americans or not. What kind of screws? Well, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan is one option, but there are others. The big unknown here is whether the covert anti-Putin opposition inside the Kremlin – what I refer to as the “Atlantic Integrationists” – and their allies in the West (big banking and NWO organizations) have been weakened enough for Putin to overtly put pressure on the USA. Personally, I would not wager on that yet. The good news here is that both Lavrov and Shoigu are 100% “Putinists” – what I refer to as “Eurasian sovereignists” – so they will fully support Putin’s political stance.
And then there was this secret letter exchange between Obama and Putin. Clearly, and even though the two man obviously hate each other, something of substance was discussed.
If I had to guess I would say that something is likely to come out of these negotiations. Maybe a more or less symbolic and public deal combined with a second, and more substantial but secret and deniable deal. What could that deal include?
Maybe that the US would refrain from any over the board actions in Syria in exchange for a Russia tacit support for a US withdrawal from Afghanistan? Such a deal or, better, such an understanding could be easily denied by both parties (thus keeping the crazy Republicans at bay) while being to the advantage of everybody.
Do I sound too optimistic?
Well, let me ask you this: do you believe that the people who put Obama in power really want to overthrow Assad? No, I am not talking about a bellicose bitch like Hillary (who “was resigned” and replaced by Kerry). I am talking about the deep “old Anglo guard” which is the real power which selected Obama as President. The Kissingers, the Bakers, the Rockefellers, the Bushes. etc. All the folks who regardless of ethnicity or official party affiliation care much more about their American wealth than about the Likudniks in Israel. Do they want Assad out?
Consider this: by now it is pretty darn clear to all that should the so-called “Syrian” (which it ain’t) insurgency win, an al-Qaeda regime would come to power in Syria and that would be really bad news, no not for Russia or China, but for the USA. Even the CIA says so. And why would the US want to replace Assad who did such an excellent job torturing rendered CIA detainees for Uncle Sam anyway?
Sure, the Ziolobby wants wars everywhere. In Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in Somalia, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Iran and, of course, Syria. And if the Ziolobby get’s its way, no amount of 2+2 negotiations between Russia and the US will ever yield any result. But the fact is that the Ziolobby does not control the White House at this time (if it did an attack on Iran would already have happened a while ago).
Now, of course, no US politician would ever commit the mother of all heresies and admit that the US and Israel might have different interests. Hagel tried, a long time ago, and he paid hell for it. So this is why Obama cannot openly step on the breaks with this war in Syria. Officially, the US and its moronic EU allies are “in” to the hilt, such are the requirements of their ideology. But I bet you that in their private deliberations they realize that the war on Syria looks much less than the war against Libya and much more like the war in Iraq, or even worse, the war in Somalia.
The absolutely undeniable fact remains that the plutocratic and imperialistic West is far better off dealing with a known and rational actor like Assad than with some al-Nusra version of Mullah Omar. This, in turn, tells me that Washington might be better off letting the Russians “win” Syria then trying to overthrow Assad at all costs – assuming that it could do that, which I don’t believe. The facts on the ground seem to indicate that it is not Russia that “won” in Syria as much as it is the Syrian military which has created on the ground the conditions needed to convince the more rational part of the US power elites that now is the time to slowly and carefully walk away from this mess.
Just to make this clear: I know that this one is far from over and there is a good chance the the “crazies” in the USA will prevail and make any deal with Russia impossible. And if, God forbid, the Hillary-types ever come back to power (I hear that she is probably going to run for President again!!), then all bets are off – and the bloodbath will resume at an even bigger scale. My hope is that the rational folks in the US will manage to prevail against the “crazies” and allow an outcome which is really to everybody’s advantage.
Do such rational people exist in the US power elites? Absolutely. Let me give you a little known but quite amazing example.
Several Russian sources, including Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin himself, have confirmed that when Georgia attacked South Ossetia and Russian peacekeepers on 08.08.08 there had been an initial move of US military forces to provide direct military help, possibly including cruise missile strikes, to their Georgian allies. What happened then is crucial: Russian military commanders directly contacted their US colleagues and told them in no uncertain terms that the US should stay out of this one or face a Russian military response. Rogozin himself told the same thing to the NATO military commander in Brussels. Basically, Russia threatened the US with war if the Americans directly intervened. And the Americans backed down and withdrew. No, not because the Americans are cowards or because they thought Russia would win – no, they did so simply because to persist was not worth the risk. In 08.08.08 Russia simply could not back down: its soldiers had been attacked and killed and its vital security interests were involved. In contrast, no vital or even important US national interest was affected by this war. Needless to say, the likes of McCain, Bolton or Hillary are simply unable to think in such rational, pragmatic, political terms. But even if, say, the “crazies” were in full control of the White House, there would still be the formidable power of the Joint Chiefs who would veto any irresponsible decision by a crazy President (at least so far, this seems to have been the case).
All this is to say that there are rational people in the US power elites and that, at least as far as I know, Kerry and Hegel are much closer to such pragmatists than loonies like Hillary or McCain.
To be an optimist, even a cautious one, is always a bad bet in international affairs. Nor is it my natural inclination. But I do want to believe that bringing such top quality people like Kerry, Hegel, Lavrov and Shoigu together is not done just to agree on nothing. Nor is such an exercise needed when the agreement is easy and obvious. No, you bring folks like that together when you want to get something tricky but very important done, when you want to make darn sure that all parties understand and agree to the terms of the understanding.
We will soon know. Chances are I will be making my mea culpa here in just a few days. But until then I will try to force myself to hope that the bloodbath in Syria can be gradually reduced.
One more thing: the negotiations over the US missile “defense” program (which should really be called the “US first strike enabling program”) are going nowhere. Even though Obama & Co. fully realize that this is just a handout to the US military-industrial complex, and that this program will do nothing to protect the USA or Europe, they will stubbornly stick to it. First, this is an easy way to show McCain and the other “crazies” how “tough” the Democrats can be on Russia, but even more fundamentally this is a typical Obama move: his entire Presidency has been centered on giving billions of dollars to the banks, Big Pharma, the military-industrial complex, etc. As for the Russians, they will not like it, but they can easily defeat its purpose by a few well chosen asymmetrical measures. Everything is possible, I suppose, but I don’t see any agreement between the two sides on this one.
Does anybody else want to hazard a guess on what will come out from these 2+2 talk?
The Saker
Saker Message:
Very good article and analysis. You gave me some things to think about, and thank you.
I do agree that some people in the Washington power structure would like to find a way to exit the Syria mess without losing face, but I don’t know who they are- I only believe that they must exist somewhere. I don’t think Obama is one of them- he hasn’t enough personal integrity to do much more than go with the flow- like a cork on the water, and we know what the strongest current is.
The only way the few real opponents to the crazies could get out of Syria would be to render the matter simply impossible, and blatantly so, and hope to garner enough popularity with the public that they can survive the inevitable attack from the warmongers and Israel. This would be difficult to do, but it is one matter the Russians could help with.
In fact, I think the Russians have been trying to help Washington make a face-saving exit, by helping to define the matter in ethical terms, and providing clear evidence pointing to the right decision. Washington does not appear to be listening.
The opportunity to get away from the wrong side in Syria has already presented itself repeatedly over the course of the war. The “rebels” have been committing so many atrocities, and each revelation, each horrible video, and each refusal to attend civilized meetings was an opportunity for Obama to publicly denounce them and withdraw support from the advantage of the high moral ground. He did not do that.
I’m an optimist by nature, but I don’t expect much from this meeting.
I don’t know about Hagel, but Kerry is hardly high-quality anything. His appointment as Sec of State was a clear signal that the US has absolutely no intention of settling anything diplomatically- superficial blather is what Kerry does best, and that’s why he’s there.
Lavrov and Shoigu recently had a “2+2” meeting that I find far more interesting- with Italy. Do you have any insight about that one?
I wish it were so, but the one thing I can say about US policy (on anything really) is that it is relentless. Look at Cuba. Look at Iran. And now Syria. It is without doubt US policy to overthrow Assad. That doesn’t mean they will succeed, it just means they will never stop trying.
And so whatever deal Bandar offered, the Americans are prepared to sweeten it. And there is some degree of desperation in them, because simply put, the US simply can’t ever admit that it and all its allies were faced down by a combination of Russia, Iran and Syria. (China was more like a cheerleader on the sidelines.)
The US must also prevent any situation where Russia will feel emboldened to offer protection to other countries targeted by the US/NATO.
Hopefully Putin is aware of how important all this is to Russia and the world in general and will not trade:
“heroes for ghosts,
Hot ashes for trees,
Hot air for a cool breeze”
As for what Obama wants deep down, I don’t know. I’m not even sure he cares one way or the other, as long as he doesn’t get blamed for it. He is definitely a path of least resistance kind of guy. I do agree there are sane and rational people in the US military, …officers and gentlemen of the old tradition…, who will try to push that path towards something less destructive.
To the extent they are able.
OTOH, I also could be wrong, and Obama’s appointments of Hagel and General Dempsey as chair of JCOS could be his means of pushing back against the crazies.
I don’t think the Western banks have much power over Russia. My understanding is they can’t even open branches in the country – they can have subsidiaries but these are controlled by the Russian Central Bank.
Russia is one of the only countries in the world which is economically independent of the Empire and also has enough military power to keep it at bay. This is the reason why there is so much hostility to Russia from the NWO elites.
@Sky: Very good article and analysis. You gave me some things to think about, and thank you.
No, thank you for these kind words! Honestly, I wrote this knowing full well that I was mostly likely wrong. Yet, since such a version of events was *possible* I thought that it was worth submitting it for discussion, which is what happened, and I am delighted by your reactions.
I do agree that some people in the Washington power structure would like to find a way to exit the Syria mess without losing face, but I don’t know who they are- I only believe that they must exist somewhere
Here is what I can say about that: they existed for sure in the past and I knew some of them personally including one Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (Elmo Zumwalt) and one Secratary of the Navy (Paul Nitze). I have good reasons to believe that they still exist today (folks like Admiral Fallon or General Craddock).
I don’t think Obama is one of them
No, of course not, he is just a spineless spokesman *FOR* them. I did not mean to suggest that he himself has any relevant role other than being an attractive facade.
In fact, I think the Russians have been trying to help Washington make a face-saving exit, by helping to define the matter in ethical terms, and providing clear evidence pointing to the right decision. Washington does not appear to be listening
Well, saving the face of their most dangerous enemy is not going to be a priority in the Kremlin, but they would not hesitate to present their real goal (keep Assad in power) as a way to help the US “declare victory and leave”.
The opportunity to get away from the wrong side in Syria has already presented itself repeatedly over the course of the war (…) He did not do that.
True, but the more time passes the more a US “victory” in Syria starts to look like a real calamity. Hence the US might eventually realize that they need out.
I don’t know about Hagel, but Kerry is hardly high-quality anything. His appointment as Sec of State was a clear signal that the US has absolutely no intention of settling anything diplomatically
Friend, do you remember HILLARY before Kerry?! You have to compare the two to get a feel for what Kerry is. First, and unlike that crazy bitch, the man is a good diplomat and keeps his tongue in check. Second, he is a puppet who, just like Obama, will do what he is told to do. And there is no denial that at least with Kerry the US and Russia are talking. Under Hillary no meaningful talks could even occur.
superficial blather is what Kerry does best, and that’s why he’s there.
Agreed. But that kind of blather is what is needed for the USA at this point in time.
Lavrov and Shoigu recently had a “2+2” meeting that I find far more interesting- with Italy. Do you have any insight about that one?
No, but I suspect that the two sides discussed mostly military contacts (though that is only a guess).
Thanks a lot for your comments!!
The Saker
@Lysander:I wish it were so, but the one thing I can say about US policy (on anything really) is that it is relentless. Look at Cuba. Look at Iran. And now Syria. It is without doubt US policy to overthrow Assad. That doesn’t mean they will succeed, it just means they will never stop trying.
Alas, you are right. What I hope is that just like with Venezuela or Ecuador they put that on the back burner at least for the time being. After all, and to my utter amazement, the attack on Iran has STILL not happened, even though it is still pretty much inevitable in the long run. But yes, you are right, they will never really leave Syria alone, if only because Uncle Sam only knows of two types of regimes: puppets and enemies.
Hopefully Putin is aware of how important all this is to Russia and the world in general and will not trade
Only time will show, but I am willing to bet that he will not.
I do agree there are sane and rational people in the US military, …officers and gentlemen of the old tradition
Exactly. They are not necessarily deeply moral saints, but at least they are sane and rational, not like the “crazies”.
Cheers!
The Saker
@Robert: I don’t think the Western banks have much power over Russia.
Not on a “street level” but on a top level. Russia is still forced to keep its reserves in the USA, the Russian Central Bank is still far more loyal to international finance than it is to the Russian economy. Russian oligarchs still are out there, not as visible as Berezovsky or Khodorkovsky, but they are still a huge threat to Putin. Pretty much all major Russian corporations are controlled from abroad where they have their corporate headquarters and major stockholders. A huge chunk of the Russian money is still off-shored and therefore can be subject to blackmail or seizure by international banking cartels. Russia is still forced to keep its interest rates ridiculously high. Russian laws do not give the government any meaningful forms to control the outflow of money. Etc. etc. etc. I could go on for a long while.
I assure you that while Putin has made IMMENSE progress, this is a very slow, difficult and, frankly, dangerous process with him and that at the present time Russia is sill half-colonized by Western & NWO interests while Putin’s scope to maneuver is very limited.
Again, Putin did a fantastic job in what is called now called the “process of sovereignization” in Russia and I am confident that he will succeed. As his closest advisors have been saying, all Russia needs to succeed is 3-4 more years of peace and stability. After that, Russia will be able to act like a truly sovereign state (like China for example), but until then this very covert (although less covert since the sacking of Serdiukov) “war” will continue with both sides fighting with everything they have to prevail.
The anti-Putin and even anti-Russian hysteria in the Western corporate press has to be understood as an integral part of this process. All the crap about Litvinenko, about Magnitsky, about Khodorkovsky, all the hysterics about Pussy Riot and “gay parades”, all this talk of Snowden, boycotting the Olympics in Sochi or not drinking Russian vodka – these are all attempts by the NWO to find a way to destabilize Russia by finding a chink in the armor of the Putin regime. As long as they don’t find it, Putin prevails rather easily each time. But they will keep looking. Relentlessly. The good news is that their window of opportunity is closing fast: 3-4 years max. After that Russia is free.
Cheers,
The Saker
@Sky, Lysander, Robert & everybody else:
I just wanted to thank you all for your really excellent comments. As I said, when I posted this rather optimistic guess about what might happen at this 2+2 I knew that chances were good that I was wrong. But still, is it not interesting to look at maybe less likely but still possible scenarios? And that is what we are doing together now and I have to say that this is very gratifying for me because that was one of my goals when I started this blog: to offer a space for a truly free exchange of views fed by either posts of mine or the re-publishing of interesting articles (like the ones of Pepe Escobar or M K Bhadrakumar). With time things got so good that more and more people posted “off-topic” comments which I always encouraged simply because I always saw the main article only as a “bait” to begin an interesting discussion. But if the main article does not provide such a ‘bait’, or if something else interesting has happened – why not discuss it indeed!
I try to answer most comments the best I can. But please do not take that as some kind of need to “win” the argument or be “right”. In most cases, I am only trying to further “bait” you for another counter-argument. I can honestly say that I prefer a diversity of views to a unanimous agreement on everything (which is plain boring).
So please keep them comment going and show me no mercy when you disagree with me :-)
Again, friends, thanks a lot! I immensely appreciate your comments.
The Saker
Do as Simon says not as Simon does.
As it has been noted long before by other people and even an RT report itself the US and other government have sheltered terrorists and criminals evading Russian charges who were/are using their stolen wealth to buy influence in the west in press and government or are actively on the payroll of the US government the most obvious example being the separatist foreign minister Illyas Akhmadov’s position at the National Endowment for Democracy.
With Russia and Snowden he is given a 1 year asylum with the condition that he does not disclose any documents and will likely not receive a penny of state benefits.
Where are all these do gooder European states in all of this that are quick to denounce Russia on issues like gay rights but completely silent on the whole Snowden affair.
Kerry also backtracked on his last meeting with Lavrov, re: Geneva II and its supposed contents. Kerry is still much better than the likes of Rice, Clinton, Power and Slaughter, but he is cowardly and spineless. Just recall the 2004 debates with Bush II; he could have pulverized Bush over Iraq but deliberately held back. He was also right about the quagmire in Afghanistan, but refused to fight for his position on the surge. So, he has good instincts, probably as a result of his experience in Vietnam, but is weak and scared to fight for his own views.
Everyone is making good points here. On the one hand, the collapse of the Syrian regime would only lead to chaos or to a quasi-Taliban or ‘Islamic Courts’ state. Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, and Kurdistan would also be destabilized, as would Egypt. Clearly, there are forces within the US state that recognize these potentialities, and the White House is probably worried about them.
On the other hand, the White House, Congress, and mainstream media has made such an ideological commitment to regime change that any compromise would only degrade US power, culturally and materially.
The US still has the option of bleeding Syria through low intensity proxy warfare and this will probably continue as long as the White House can ignore the calls for intervention by the liberal hawks and neocons. This approach would fit with Obama’s typical mode of operation: going with the flow, not leading, and building policy on hope, not strategy.
For the White House to find a rapprochement with Russia on Syria, it will have to overcome the Ziolobby in Congress. Until that happens, expect a low intensity conflict to persist.
Unless, that is, Israel comes to think that a crazy sunni state in Syria would be worse than the current one.
What do you think?
I reckon that Israel fears the resistance axis much more than the wahhabi psychos, and thus will keep pushing the conflict through Congress.
http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2013/08/10/us-russia-will-pause-and-play/
@Anonymous12:19 :Kerry also backtracked on his last meeting with Lavrov, re: Geneva II and its supposed contents. Kerry is still much better than the likes of Rice, Clinton, Power and Slaughter, but he is cowardly and spineless
Absolutely undeniable
The US still has the option of bleeding Syria through low intensity proxy warfare
Yes, and I hope that they go for that because of the Assad regime is given enough time it will have the opportunity to generate not only skilled generals (which it seems to have), but also strong spiritual Sunni leaders like Akhmad Kadyrov who can challenge the insurgency not with firepower, but with a superior understanding of Islam – a spiritual counter-attack on the Wahabi ideology. At least that would be my hope because I strongly believe that no form of spirituality can be defeated by pure force, that is as true for a luminous and love-filled spirituality as it is for a dark, hate-filled one. A spirituality can only be defeated by another spirituality.
For the White House to find a rapprochement with Russia on Syria
Maybe,but a purely short-term, tactical, pragmatic one. Because at least as far as Russia is concerned the US Empire (as opposed to the USA as a country and a people) is a now clearly, almost officially, recognized existential threat similar in nature to the Papist threat against Russia from the 13th through the 20th century. I am absolutely confident that Russia will never “sell out” Syria as long as Putin is in power, not only because of the (truly rather limited) importance of Syria for Russia (it is mostly emotional) but because the Kremlin sees the war in Syria as a way to stop the US Empire and force it to accept a multi-polar world order.
Unless, that is, Israel comes to think that a crazy sunni state in Syria would be worse than the current one. What do you think?
God only (or, should I say, Satan only) knows what the Israeli deep state really thinks! I have said it many times here, I not only do not believe that the Israelis are so smart and all-knowing, I actually believe that they are rather stupid, blinded by their own racist ideology, and capable of the worst and most obvious self-defeating actions. Their arrogance literally knows no limits and that is just not a mind set which is favorable to sophisticated long-term strategy planning.
Even though the corporate media does not write about it, it appears that not only do the Israelis regularly bomb Syria, they are now expanding their bombing campaigns to Egypt (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35799.htm). What can I say?! These folks are totally insane, gone fishing, apeshit! You name it. I will say that at least at this moment in time the USA does not appear to be willing to take any order out of the Israel Lobby and that is definitely good news for everybody (including the Israeli people!).
What do you think?
Cheers,
The Saker
@Anonymous12:38 : thanks for the (very good) link which does seem to indicate that rational minds are, hopefully, prevailing.
But, please, can you not just post a link but also add just maybe one sentence of why you are sharing it?
Thanks and kind regards,
The Saker