By Aram Mirzaei for the Saker blog
In recent weeks, there’s been a lot of politics behind the ongoing East Ghouta military operation. Western government officials have all been “outraged” at the carnage resulting from the Syrian Army siege of the Islamist-held East Ghouta region of Damascus. They have all right to be angry, after all it’s their terrorist investments that are being battered on the battlefield. The success of the Syrian Army on the battlefield against Western-backed jihadists is always followed by crude accusations against the Syrian Army. Again, the poor jihadists of East Ghouta have fallen prey to government use of chemical weapons and Washington, along with its cohorts shall come to the rescue, especially if the UN fails to agree to a resolution.
Because of all this, recently, Moscow has warned on several occasions that Washington is planning to strike Syria again and has also made its allies in Syria aware of this. Some reports also claim that the Russian air defence systems are on stand-by. Despite Moscow’s warnings, I wasn’t fully convinced until the “Coalition” spokesman said that “pro-regime forces are building up near US troops in Syria”. This sounds very similar to what happened a few weeks ago when the “coalition” decided to “defend” itself from the Syrian Army, inside Syria. Washington basically admitted to their plans of striking sometime in the near future with this simple statement. It would also make sense that Washington would want to please the Saudi Prince Muhammad Bin Salman (MBS), especially since he bought American weapons worth several billion dollars recently, so a few U.S Tomahawk strikes on Damascus would probably suffice to please MBS.
Moscow seems committed to the task of defending Syria from future attacks, having openly declared that it will not tolerate another attack on Syria and that it will respond to such attacks that endanger the lives of Russian servicemen. Tehran has warned Washington against taking any foolish decisions in the Middle East, but remains rather silent on how it will respond to further U.S aggression.
Most of the so called “Iranian forces” in Syria are actually different IRGC supported militias drawn from the greater Middle East’s Shia populations. These are called the “Defenders of the Holy Shrine” and are recruited in theory to defend the Sayyida Zainab Shrine in Damascus, but in reality they have fought numerous battles across the Aleppo, Homs and Hama provinces.
Israel- Iran a conflict within a conflict
These militias and Iran fight a parallel war in Syria, alongside the Syrian government forces. While the Syrian government forces are fighting US-backed or Turkish-backed jihadists, Iran and its plethora of allied militias, including Hezbollah, are fighting Israel and its proxies. These are indeed the same groups but the difference lies in the narration of this conflict. The Syrian cause is a nationalist one, while the Iranian one is a religiously inspired movement uniting Lebanese, Syrians, Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis, Iranians and so on. Tel Aviv knows all of this, and it also knows that its proxies are being defeated. This is why they are so worried about Syria becoming an “Iranian base”. Before this war began, Israel only had Hezbollah to worry about, now they have a vast amount of Anti-Zionist militias, battle-hardened and standing right at their northern doorsteps. I find it rather unlikely that Iranian forces would be targeted by the U.S as most Iranian forces are stationed in Damascus whereas Washington’s threats seemed to be directed against forces in the Euphrates Valley or the Al-Tanf area bordering Jordan. Israel on the other hand almost always targets Damascus when it violates Syrian airspace.
In the unlikely event that the U.S would target Iranian forces, or that it would start a large scale assault on Syrian government forces, Tehran could retaliate by attacking Israel for two reasons, Israel’s proximity and because Tehran knows that Washington is hurt more by the loss of Israeli lives than that of its own soldiers. Israeli aggression was last month met with the downing of an Israeli fighter jet. In 2015, the Israeli Air force targeted several Hezbollah and IRGC commanders in Southern Syria, killing several top level people, including the son of the late Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyeh, Jihad Mughniyeh. This aggression was met with a harsh Hezbollah response on the Golan heights only a week later, killing several Israeli troops. These minor skirmishes will continue and would likely escalate if Washington decides to launch a major strike on Syria.
Another target for Iran could be Washington’s other close ally in the region, Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia’s military is U.S armed yet very inferior compared to its rivals in the Islamic World. This has been proven in its very poor intervention in Yemen, where the Wahhabi kingdom has suffered heavy casualties and has resorted to starving the population to death. The Yemen war is an embarrassment for the Saudi Army which suffers from poor morale and incompetence.
In the event that Washington decides for an all-out war on Syria directly, Tehran could either choose to strike Saudi Arabia or choose a direct confrontation with Israel as its option, relying on its missiles to “destroy Tel Aviv”, as Iranian official Mohsen Rezaei put it. If Washington however would go for another full scale proxy attack on Syria, say for example through the pitting of its proxy “Syrian Democratic Forces” against the Syrian Army, then Iran will also likely respond by proxy, unleashing its allied militias.
In the end, Tehran has always relied on multiple ways of responding to U.S aggression, it did so in Iraq and it will do so in Syria and Lebanon as well. To Iran and its allies, Syria is not a separate conflict from the ones in Iraq and Yemen, but rather part of the same Anti-Zionist struggle, this means that an attack on one country, could result in a response in the other country.
Well this is certainly cheery information to know.
hahaha – funny comment John Neal Spangler – I was thinking along the same lines – it would be nice to sit back and just see the hypothetical Israel wiped off the map – but there might be some blood…yuck —
There will be a lot of “shining” irradiated blood soon
http://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/news/world-news/2272-us-and-17-other-countries-expel-russian-diplomats-ambassador-says-relations-with-the-usa-are-destroyed-congress-gets-emergency-briefing-as-talk-of-war
This sentence seems problematic:
“Moscow seems committed to the task of defending Syria from future attacks, having openly declared that it will not tolerate another attack on Syria and that it will respond to such attacks that endanger the lives of Russian servicemen.”
Moscow seems to be saying two separate things: it will not tolerate another attack on Syria, but more specifically, it will not tolerate an attack on Russian (servicemen). So which is it that Russia will not tolerate, a general attack or a specific attack? And what exactly constitutes Russian servicemen? Will Russia tolerate Syrians and Russian mercenaries getting blown away as long as regular Russian troops are spared?
This kind of rhetoric is a vague line in the sand that invites testing, especially since it has been expressed before by Moscow.
…”At the same time in Damascus, in the offices and facilities of the Ministry of Defense of Syria, there are now Russian military advisers, representatives of the Center for the Reconciliation of Warring Parties and military police, Gerasimov stressed”….
By hitting Damascus or Ghouta, US would likely hit some of Russian regular forces as well. Russian special forces are also embedded with SAA, advancing in Eastern Ghouta.
So basically hitting SAA in this region would probably be a hit on Russian forces as well.
Yes, American “partners” have been warned. Syrian Ambassador to the UN announced that soon all the occupied parts of Syria will be taken back. So, yes Israel was warned as well. Golan Hights and their vast water supplies will be back were they belong. All we have to do is wait. The key point I am making is that the last seven years gave Syria time to shake off the fear of Israel. It was a slow process but “West” can thank itself for that.
vague – true – basically an exit clause for Putin
Given the downing of an Israeli F-16 by new Russian defenses in Syria, a US response is likely to be cruise missiles — which were only 50% effective last time. Additionally, there is more than a suggestion that those missiles not deflected were allowed to proceed by deliberate Russian design.
In short, the US may be humiliated in the ongoing Syrian saga with an 90% +/- cruise missile failure. Such failure might well cause a dip in US missile sales and be a smart way for Russia to hit back, namely in the US arms trade pocket book.
General Mattis is not stupid and will undoubtedly object to a repeated cruise missile attack.
Since last failed cruise missile attack by US, Russia has brought much more sophisticated weaponry to Syria, mostly EW state of the art equipment.
F16 apparently downed by S200 – advanced Russian defences are waiting for F22/35
poor Ahed Tamimi and her country – -if Iran obliterates Israel – which in and of itself would be great I suppose –
Alas, poor Hegemon, defeated at every turn. Rogue State near panic, dreams of Eretz Isra’el in tatters. Damascus delenda est!
Enter the new King David, AKA John Bolton. War is the answer!
Except, the protagonist in all of this, the maker of peace and the keeper of the historic kingdoms (Damascus and Moscow), VVP, Chess player, judo master.
Pawns, rooks, and knights, carefully placed, carefully guarded, chess master waits for the New King David to make an off-balance move. Chess master will take a few pieces with pawns, but when New King David leads with the Queen, off balance and ill-advised, judo master will complete the throw.
And Jerusalem too, might yet have a new king – Nasrallah – King of Jerusalem in waiting
The fake BS Israel should be worried, they got thoroughly battered in 2 other previous instances in history. The first time it was done by a coalition of nations who are considered a part of the modern day middle east, the second time it was by the Roman empire, but a portion of the army was made up from people of the middle east. The storm clouds are gathering again for that little satanic shit hole. I been waiting for the collapse of that oppressive state since I was 5 years old, I’m close to 30 now. If I don’t see it, maybe my future kids will. I will leave you guys with some verses from the Quran, where Allah (swt) warns them about future mischief in the Holy land.
Sura al- Isra 17: 4-9
4. And We conveyed to the Children of Israel in the Scripture: You will commit evil on earth twice, and you will rise to a great height.
5. When the first of the two promises came true, We sent against you servants of Ours, possessing great might, and they ransacked your homes. It was a promise fulfilled.
6. Then We gave you back your turn against them, and supplied you with wealth and children, and made you more numerous.
7. If you work righteousness, you work righteousness for yourselves; and if you commit evil, you do so against yourselves. Then, when the second promise comes true, they will make your faces filled with sorrow, and enter the Temple as they entered it the first time, and utterly destroy all that falls into their power.
8. Perhaps your Lord will have mercy on you. But if you revert, We will revert. We have made Hell a prison for the disbelievers.
9. This Quran guides to what is most upright; and it gives good news to the believers who do good deeds, that they will have a great reward.
Trump administration official strategy has been laid out back in december : End of globalization and hard competition against “revisionist” powers (China, Russia)
Since then we got the Tariffs war started.
Russia said that several gas attack have been thwarted in Syria. Whereas NATO countries said clearly that such attack would justify NATO strikes.
In this context Putin provided glimpse info RF missile and nuclear dominance.
Not very difficult to connect the dots.
It is probable that the Skripal case coupled with false flag attack in Syria were intended to block Russia reaction or justify escalation with direct NATO confrontation with Russia. Typical propaganda war.
Cherry on the cake. Everything is not lost for the Anglo. The Skripal case officialize the new cold war and further the demonization of Russia.
It lays ground for direct military confrontation.
It polarizes alliances and slow/stop EU (mostly Germany) move toward Eurasian integration (Nordstream 2).
In this situation, European NATO statelets are not sovereign countries. They are toys into the Anglo, Ruskies and China power play.
The deep state players are addictively committed to their impossible dream of world domination. They must and will lead our world into nuclear destruction due to this obsession. This process is nearing it’s deadly endpoint very soon now. This Spring is the most dangerous period in the history of human existence on Earth.
“In this situation, European NATO statelets are not sovereign countries. They are toys into the Anglo, Ruskies and China power play.”
I can add that this sorry European state of affair it is not only due to Anglo policy.
Trump said to European in a very frank and direct fashion few months ago to grow some balls and increase their defense budget.
Trump jack then only received mockery and jeers from European “allies”.
European nations are truly satelets. Happy to be slaves but nonetheless profiteers of the Anglo Empire. Still day dreaming that about liberal globalization whereas the US backer said that it is the end of it. And on top of that insulting the US president.
Truly arrogant and disgusting.
The Skripal case is nice wake up call for all European political lowlife.
Not sure if the option of Iran targeting Saudi Arabia is such a good idea….wouldn’t this trigger a counterproductive wider Shia- Sunni conflict?
Serbian Girl
Well the Saudi Monarchy is not Sunni. They are Wahhabi, they call themselves Salafi, but if you delve into history that’s a baseless claim. The more accurate name for them is Wahhabi, because they follow the interpretation of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab(in my opinion a deviant “scholar” from the 17th century). The sunnis are the followers of the 4 scholars of jurisprudence(Hanifa, Shaff’i, Malik, Hanbal). After these 4 scholars, the sunnis closed the “doors of interpretation.” Meaning if any interpretation of Islamic law comes after them, they cant be considered part of the Sunni sect. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab came way after the 4 sunnis scholars of jurisprudence. So that’s the quickest way i can explain how the Wahhabi’s are not part of the Sunni sect.
Unfortunately you’re point still holds though. Because the Muslim world is in such a state of ignorance, many sunnis sadly will view a potential attack of Iran on Saudi Arabia as a shia attack on “sunnisim”, even though that’s not the case as i explained above. Muslims stopped studying their own history, so they become really easy to be tricked. This is something the Saudis, Americans, Brits, Israelis and others have capitalized on . The reason for this confusion are many, the wahhabi’s are a very deceitful bunch, and since they have all that Saudi oil money they are able to put out a lot of propaganda. It also helps when the western world is their biggest ally, so the west also wants wahhabisim to be seen as what’s considered “true Islam.” It helps keep
the Muslim world divided, and also helps in the wests propaganda war against Islam.
Because the sunnis make up 85% of the total Muslim population, the wahhabis masquerade as sunnis so they can influence a way larger population base. The wahhabi’s make up a very small % of the “Muslim” population, but their influence is really huge in the sunni world. Thankfully many in the Muslim world are waking up to the deceit of the Wahhabi movement, unfortunately it takes catastrophes like ISIS, al-qaida, al-nusra, and other such terrorist groups to wake them up. I am noticing a positive trend however, where more Sunnis scholars are warning about the dangers of the wahabbi movement. It is not a surprise that all those western funded terriost groups i mentioned all follow the wahhabi brand. I wish for the downfall of the Saudi and the wahhabi movement as much as i hope for the down fall of the fake state of Israel.
I hope that helps answer you’re question.
The Holy Qur’an in all its magnificent and divine recitation, warns believers that Satan tempts
the great Ummah with trickery and deception to lead them into darkness.
Sura 4:119
Whom Allah has cursed. And he said, ‘I will assuredly take a fixed portion from Thy servants;
Sura 4:120
‘And assuredly I will lead them astray and assuredly I will excite in them vain desires, and assuredly I will incite them and they will cut the ears of cattle; and assuredly I will incite them and they will alter Allah’s creation.’ And he who takes Satan for a friend beside Allah has certainly suffered a manifest loss.
Just my SWAG but I would say it is all part of a plan. If you go by the view that nothing happens by chance in this world then the Shia & Sunni are being setup to obliterate each other.
First you need a long standing feud that people will kill each other over. Look no further than the 1,500 year old dispute at the heart of Islam. No real solution will ever be acceptable to both sides. One group destroys the other is the only way these type of disputes are settled.
Second you need a common border on land. Yes you can kill a lot of people with air power, missles and naval power but to really do a geoncide on a large scale you need to inflict starvation and disease. To do that requires a ground war.
Iraq is 65% Shia but as long as Saddam was the ruler they couldn’t be mobilised against Saudi Arabia. Then Sadam was gone and the Shia militias took control of south Iraq. They take orders from Iran. A nice long mutual border is now all there is between them.
Third step is to arm them to the teeth. Russia is supplying Iran and the USA is supplying Saudi Arabia. Lots of money to be made on both sides. Look for both sides to arm the border more. Once they resolve their current diversions (Islamic State & Yemen) the border arming will intensify.
Finally you need some pretext to get the ball rolling. A Saudi purge of Shia from the Arabian peninsula which has already started in Yemen will intensify and go internal as well. The west will do nothing but supply more arms to Saudi Arabia. An attack on the north shore oil port & refinery of Ras Tanura will be blamed on Iran. Rightly or wrongly it won’t matter. At some point the tension on the common border will boil over into an open shooting war.
The Shia coalition will have a population to draw from of roughly 90 million compared to the Saudi 25 million. The Saudis have shown how bad they are at war with their Yemen actions. They will not be able to handle the Shia. They will have to rely on their Pakistani mercenaries. With 180 million to draw from they can supply large quantity of manpower but are unproven in long wars. They also have India to worry about. India will take advantage of the situation.
When the Saudis start to lose badly, as they will, the question becomes will Pakistan resort to using their nuclear weapons on Iran? Have they already given control of some to Saudi Arabia as one Saudi prince claimed? I predict the Saudis will. The USA has a defence arrangement with the house of Saud but to get in the middle of a large scale war between the two? I think that is when the house of Saud will realise how expendable it truly is.
Once the 2 groups of Muslims have devastated each other count on Israel to take advantage of the situation.
“…pro-regime forces are building up near US troops in Syria”.
You really couldn’t make this stuff up, could you? It’s like some surreal cross between an Evelyn Waugh satire and a fantasy by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
Imagine, if you will, that a couple of divisions of the Syrian Arab Army find themselves (somehow) on the ground in (for example) upstate New York.
US forces approach, and the world is warned in howling tones that “…pro-regime forces are building up near Syrian troops in the USA”.
At this point – something which is very unusual – words simply fail me.
This stood out:
“Tehran could retaliate by attacking Israel for two reasons, Israel’s proximity and because Tehran knows that Washington is hurt more by the loss of Israeli lives than that of its own soldiers.”
It is true statement, and it just goes to show how deeply the Zionists have embedded themselves in the American body politic. It is sad to say, but in reality there are a good number of ordinary US citizens who would agree with that sentiment because of their misplaced religious beliefs.
That statement also stood out to me, and I think its 100% accurate. I saw a few posters mention on this site that Russia should threaten the US with “we will nuke Tel Aviv,” if nuclear war becomes imminent.
“there are a good number of ordinary US citizens who would agree with that sentiment because of their misplaced religious beliefs.” One of things I used to kill time with, or just for laughs, was scour youtube for the crazy things “Christian” Zionist evangelicals say. It was funny for a while, but eventually I just felt bad that so many people were actually buying this nonsense. It felt like they created a new religion in which this imposter Israel was god.
Actually that is undeniably true. The Christianity that Saker and I follow is so far removed from the fundamentalist type you find in the rural US, especially among the Sola Scriptura types, that it is no exaggeration to say that they do in fact represent a new religion entirely.
Like you, they used to amuse me. But now that they are essential tools in legitimizing the Zionist agenda, I can’t find much humor in their antics anymore. What I generally feel is a cross between pity and anger with them. I think all I can really do is pray that God will open their eyes one day.
Many thanks, Mr. Mirzaei, for this very important article. It is important not least for its uplifting effect (on some).
To sketch out another dimension:
1. The multi-polar word exists and it is already the most powerful guarantor of peace, or deterrent against war, this planet has ever seen. This has global dimensions, but in war, it is the immediate battlefield that counts. You provide many facets of evidence of how the multi-polar world functions in Syria.
The multi-polar world is on the offensive, it enjoys the protective fist of the Russian Federation, and it is the empire that is trying to react.
I will try to illustrate this. – The German Sputnik carried an article this morning, “Enthauptungsschlag gegen Damaskus: Russland gibt Ko89ntra – USA lenken um” / trans: Decapitation strike against Damascus: Russia counters – USA redisposes (https://de.sputniknews.com/zeitungen/20180326320074296-schlag-gegen-syrien-usa/). It would take too long to recapitulate the entire article, so I will pick out the basic points. General Gerasimov warned (although warned is not really accurate, let’s say he flatly announced) that, in the event of a US missile attack against Syria (under whatever pretext, e.g. poison-gas attack), Russia will not only take out the missiles (direct interception, EW) but also the platforms from which they are fired. The German Sputnik article works through how Russia would approach the military problem of thwarting a saturation missile strike, first against Syrian and Russian air-defenses, and then main strikes against, for example, Damascus: decapitation. These considerations all involve strikes launched from the eastern Mediterranean. The announcement that the Russians would also take out the platforms from which the missiles are fired is not only a “threatened“ escalation, it is a purely military consideration: you have to take out the platforms – in the air or at sea – to prevent the saturation strike because these platforms do not and cannot unload all of their missiles at the same time, so there is a counter-strike window of opportunity that has to be exploited. As the article points out, the US side obviously saw that the announcement was no mere threat, because no strike was carried out last week, so US increased attention and planning was invested in US assets in the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, which are far enough way, so that Russia would have more problems countering missiles launched from these locations. The article then also pointed out that it was likely that Israel would seek to help the US.
The article makes an unstated assumption: from a purely military point of view, the short-term development of a capability is to be read as the intent to use it. The US had set up to carry out a strike from the eastern Mediterranean, but did not carry it out. The assumption is that, if the US had calculated they could carry out the strike, they would have done it. But this is a purely military assumption, without any speculation that the capability reflects the existence of a political decision to carry out a strike.
Russia had demonstrated a deterrent without firing a shot. That deterrent consisted of (1) a Russian General Staff statement of what the response will be, (2) based on capabilities demonstrated earlier and (3) deployment of additional hardware, which all combined to make the deterrent completely credible.
But the other component of deterrence is uncertainty.—As you point out, Iran has not made specific statements on what it would do in case of a US military attack on Syria. Here, the uncertainty is mixed with known capability: the US Navy knows all of its ships are “a risk.” The uncertainty is the extent to which Russia and Iran have coordinated at the military level: does Iran sink the ship that launches the first Tomahawk in the direction of Syria? The US does not know and cannot know, but it is clear that Iran will not allow such a “decapitation strike“ against Damascus. And if the US cannot strike from the Persian Gulf or the Red Sea, they will not strike because they cannot strike. – As General Votel / CentCom told the US Congress, Syria has won.
While the article says (or calculates) that Israel might try to help the US, in fact this is a massive uncertainty for the US. Will the Israeli General Staff allow Netanyahu to put the existence of Israel at risk for the sake of a US gamble to protect its terrorist army, with Syria and allies closing in on Al Tanf and the Yarmouk Camp, not agreeing to let the US have the territory east of the Euphrates to the Iraqi border, with insurrection against the US-backed Kurds in Raqqa? (The Syrian leadership is clearly on the offensive, not at all deterred or afraid of US decapitation. I believe they are right, as they have always been right.) And Hezbollah’s missiles ready to fire? How fast does Israel really want to lose the Golan Heights?
As I said, the multi-polar world exists, each party has interests of its own, but they intersect in ways that may appear magical to the empire, but they make US military gambles look like Russian roulette with all chambers full.
I cannot fathom HOW the Sputnik article can refer to a “saturation” strike by US / NATO vessels on Damascus – there are simply NOT enough missiles to “saturate” a target anywhere in Syria – a Saturation strike has to be sustained – for perhaps days, non stop for it to be effective. US-NATO vessels do not carry that amount of hardware.
Iran and Hizbollah on the other hand have exactly that – a missile force capable of sustained barrages for lengthy periods of time to overwhelm Israeli missile defences and wreak deadly havoc on major Israeli cities – an extremely plausable and highly likely scenario IF the US/NATO attempts a strike on Damascus.
Iran will never attack Israel first. They know full well that will bring the US in on the side of Israel and start the US war on Iran that the US wants. They probably won’t attack Saudi Arabia first either for the same reason.
I believe that Israel intends for it and the US to attack Hizballah in Lebanon this year. They also hope to get the US to extend that war into Syria.
The original plan was for Syria’s military to be degraded first, to allow Israel to cross Syrian territory to attack Hizballah in the Bekaa Valley. Russia entering the Syrian conflict stopped that plan. So now Israel has to depend on the US to join it in an attack on Hizballah.
Russia may or may not intervene if Israel attacks Lebanon. Russia is trying to get a military cooperation treaty with Lebanon, as a warning to Israel, but I doubt Russia will intervene directly if the next conflict is strictly between Israel/US and Hizballah.
However, Russia is likely to intervene if that war spills over into Syria and threatens the Syrian government. The problem is that both the US and Russia risk escalation if they are forced to confront each other in Syria. Russia and Israel also face the same problem, although Israel has been war-gaming what to do if Russia intervenes against Israel. Russia would prefer not to fight Israel, but I believe they will if Syria’s survival is directly threatened.
As The Saker has pointed out before, Russia has limited options in Syria against a full-scale US attack. The best Russia can hope for is to force the US to back down due to the threat of escalation to WWIII.
Now that Bolton is National Security Adviser, I think we can count on Trump going along with a combined US/Israel attack on Hizballah in Lebanon, and likely into Syria. I expect to happen sometime after Trump tears up the Iran deal, which allegedly he intends to do in May.
“Top notch analysis!” READ!”