Corvus
Dagobah Resident
April drop death date maybe next year?
Russia Begins Operations in Syria: End Game for the US Empire?
- Thread starter Ocean
- Start date
I wouldn't take any declarations at face values. What's real are actions. Hamas are sunnis and one tenet of sunni islam is "war is deception". So back-stabbing, deception, lies, are all fair game. Just look at Turkey and other sunni monarchies. Also, in their mind, if they don't make friends with the new caliphate in the north, they will surely starve and get annihilated. Also, there is an obsession with the grand mosque of Damascus, which is because in the sunni eschatology, that's where the return of the messiah to fight the antichrist will occur at the end of the times, and before that a mehdi would unify the true muslims around this mosque in Damascus. My memories about these legends are fuzzy but I think that's the general idea.
Yeah, it's becoming like a TV series with cliffhangers and plot twists galore... The C's did say it would be "thrilling".
Seato
Jedi Master
In yesterdays video Alexander Mercouris of the Duran discusses the collapse of Syria.
He acknowledges potential corruption and weakening of the Syrian army. Possibly related to the struggling economy under sanctions and Assad's reorganization of the military to a focus on ‘loyalists’ over experienced officers following the first conflict.
He is under the impression there were several things that could have been done by Syria to improve its situation, being critical of Assad. Noting his failure to engage with separate Russian and Chinese economic initiatives which could have alleviated the burden of sanctions at the cost of increased internal influence of the investing nations. The failure to appear at the Kazan Bric’s summit where he could have improved ties with his allies, fostered economic partnerships and importantly met with Erdogan of Turkey (whether this meeting would have done any good is unclear).
On the previous Syrian war Mercouris suggests Syria’s allies would have been willing to go further in clearing Syria of occupation and Assad's desire to prioritize diplomatic relations with the rebels limited this leaving strategic locations like Idlib and the many oil field under enemy control.
End of video summary.
Personally I feel a bit more sympathetic towards Assad. Though, my impression is that these events were more than a simple failure or outmaneuvering of the Syrian army. I suspect as echoed by some people here that Assad was tired of the war and had given up to some extent.
Even with the army’s initial failures he could have made a televised appearance and tried to rally the people. There could have been an actual fight for Syria and maybe with the help of its allies it might prevail once more or at least go down in a last stand. He did no such thing and his whereabouts have been unclear throughout this entire invasion until his acknowledged arrival in Moscow for asylum.
Initial enthusiasm from allies to provide aid seemed high. This invasion in a sense is part of the larger regional conflict against Iran and may have offered a possible release valve to control the anger and violent energies building between it and Israel. With most factions unwilling to directly intervene in Gaza, Syria presented a battlefield where Iran and its allies could have vented their building anger over the situation with direct action. Instead, the valve was retightened and is likely to inevitably burst under the building pressure in the near future.
On Assad, perhaps he didn’t want to put Syria through the bloodshed of a second war maybe hoping that if he could allow a relatively peaceful transition of power it would result in less suffering for the Syrian people than a new conflict.
Unfortunately, if true there is a slight error in these calculations, as even if the extremist forces were to somehow avoid becoming a violent failed state, Israel has proven it has no interest in a peaceful and stable Syria. This much is evident already with Israel’s intense renewed bombing campaign as without the Syrian army and more importantly the Russian air force, there is none to force their restraint.
He acknowledges potential corruption and weakening of the Syrian army. Possibly related to the struggling economy under sanctions and Assad's reorganization of the military to a focus on ‘loyalists’ over experienced officers following the first conflict.
He is under the impression there were several things that could have been done by Syria to improve its situation, being critical of Assad. Noting his failure to engage with separate Russian and Chinese economic initiatives which could have alleviated the burden of sanctions at the cost of increased internal influence of the investing nations. The failure to appear at the Kazan Bric’s summit where he could have improved ties with his allies, fostered economic partnerships and importantly met with Erdogan of Turkey (whether this meeting would have done any good is unclear).
On the previous Syrian war Mercouris suggests Syria’s allies would have been willing to go further in clearing Syria of occupation and Assad's desire to prioritize diplomatic relations with the rebels limited this leaving strategic locations like Idlib and the many oil field under enemy control.
End of video summary.
Personally I feel a bit more sympathetic towards Assad. Though, my impression is that these events were more than a simple failure or outmaneuvering of the Syrian army. I suspect as echoed by some people here that Assad was tired of the war and had given up to some extent.
Even with the army’s initial failures he could have made a televised appearance and tried to rally the people. There could have been an actual fight for Syria and maybe with the help of its allies it might prevail once more or at least go down in a last stand. He did no such thing and his whereabouts have been unclear throughout this entire invasion until his acknowledged arrival in Moscow for asylum.
Initial enthusiasm from allies to provide aid seemed high. This invasion in a sense is part of the larger regional conflict against Iran and may have offered a possible release valve to control the anger and violent energies building between it and Israel. With most factions unwilling to directly intervene in Gaza, Syria presented a battlefield where Iran and its allies could have vented their building anger over the situation with direct action. Instead, the valve was retightened and is likely to inevitably burst under the building pressure in the near future.
On Assad, perhaps he didn’t want to put Syria through the bloodshed of a second war maybe hoping that if he could allow a relatively peaceful transition of power it would result in less suffering for the Syrian people than a new conflict.
Unfortunately, if true there is a slight error in these calculations, as even if the extremist forces were to somehow avoid becoming a violent failed state, Israel has proven it has no interest in a peaceful and stable Syria. This much is evident already with Israel’s intense renewed bombing campaign as without the Syrian army and more importantly the Russian air force, there is none to force their restraint.
taratai
Jedi
If i was Putin, and i didn't want Israel to completely dominate in Syria, what would i do? The answer is: Erdogan.
Knowing that Syria is falling, I would let Erdogan take as much of Syria as he can while the situation is still chaotic. The more Erdogan has, the less others can take, so let him take as much as he wants! Israel cannot attack Turkish territories without angering a NATO member and risking a conflict within NATO itself.
And who knows if Turkiye won't ally with other arabic countries in the region when Israel pushes the situation to its limit? That would be the perfect hit to destabilize NATO, and i'm sure people within it and outside of it are well aware of that.
Thus, in a way, Erdogan's duplicity can be useful for Russia, so i doubt they will do any harm to him.
I like the Andrei Martyanov's take because he looks at it from a historical perspective. And I think that he is right, Arabs simply do not have good militaries. Afghanistan very quickly fell to the Taliban. Iraq quickly fell to the ISIS and had to be saved by outside forces. And now Syrian army also very quickly fell without any resistance. All those armies were trained and supported by outside forces, but it never worked. As soon as outside forces retreat, everything falls apart.
Luckily, Iranians do not consider themselves to be Arabs, so hopefully they will provide some resistance to the axis of evil.
Nothing is ever as good or as bad as it seems.
Short version
The jolani dude will not be the leader of Syria, he'll be the "interim defense minister" or something like that. Syria will likely be divided into autonomous regions, with a Sunni area in the center, Turkish controlled areas along the N. border, some kind of Kurdish area in the north east, Druze in the south and probably an alawite area covering the Russian air and naval bases on the coast, which Russia will keep. At least, that's what would naturally form if things follow a peaceful course.
The surprising speed with which the whole Syrian system collapsed is pretty clear evidence that there was a plan by Assad, under Russian direction, to cede authority to different groups in the near future. They were probably waiting for Trump to flesh out the precise details.
The Israelis and CIA knew of that plan and acted to pre-empt it so as to configure the new Syria more to their liking.
Slightly longer version:
All of this is part of the broader Russia/China-led maneuvers towards a multi-polar world. Over the last 10 years, Russia has been engaged in concerted diplomatic efforts to re-shape the Middle East away from being a disjointed mishmash of oil-rich states that it has invaded, bombed or occupied (politically or militarily or both) and those that had stubbornly resisted (not many) US domination. With Israel operating as the US' main garrison of course. And towards an integrated ME that itself is integrated into Eurasia.
Apart from all of the other moves towards a MP world, consider that in the last 18 months :
China negotiates an agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran to re-establish diplomatic relations and reopen their embassies within two months. Described by analysts as ‘a broader sign of a changing global order’
Syria (as a result of intense Russian diplomacy) is welcomed back into the Arab league.
Assad closes the Houthi embassy in Damascus and opens a Saudi embassy
It seems pretty clear to me that there already was a Russian plan for Assad to cede power to the "legitimate opposition" in Syria as part of the normalisation process of inter-state relations in the ME. This would, of course, include Israel, but the Israelis being super paranoid and distrustful of everyone were not inclined to be eventually forced to the negotiating table in a real way (finally!) with their Arab neighbors over the Palestine issue, and in general in a less dominant position.
So being aware of these plans, both Israel and the 'anglo-American establishment' decided to pre-empt them. They started with the false flag operation of Oct 7th that allowed for the destruction of Gaza making the Palestinian question a moot point. They knew this would allow for the attack on Hizb-allah and they also planned to do what they have done this week: pre-empt the Russian-led plan for Assad to cede power peacefully, and steal the initiative and have their people (HTS) be the "liberators of Damascus" and therefore be in a better position to shape the new authorities in the new Syria. Which will likely be a series of autonomous regions.
By the way, Assad and family have been in Moscow since late Nov.
Last edited:
This is an example of the average person, well meaning and all as they are, tend to not take real politik into consideration. There's the moral issue of Palestine, and then the reality on the ground. The latter being waaay more complicated.
Right, but the driving force in all of this is great power politics (it always has been throughout any significant conflict in history). You HAVE to view it through that lens if you're going to come close to understanding it. Russia and China want to remake the ME in line with their multi-polar world plans. Facilitating the destruction of any country that is central to those plans, and possibly igniting bigger conflicts, does not serve those plans at all. That's why the option of just setting things on fire has always been much more available to the US (as existing hegemon) than to their competitors.
The idea of a cohesive Syrian nation state was more or less untenable from the beginning.
With 75% Sunnis you will either have Alawites, Christians, Druze being suppressed or have the Sunnis feel dominated or suppressed by the Alawite Assad family. Regionalization meaning autonomous regions in the way mentioned above would definitely lead to some progress.
Turkey would have been the guarantor of the Sunni north, Russia and Iran that of the Alawites.
I'm not so sure about the quality of Arab armies. The Egyptians beat the Israelis in 1973, the SAA did well against the CIA uprising ten years ago, and Hisb'allah could be considered an army by any standard.
The Syrian army we are learning did not fall without resistance, I think, rather it was ordered to stand down to prevent bloodshed.
Afghanistan is not an Arab nation anyway as is Iran although there is a large Arab minority.
Yes, Syria was a product of colonial powers dividing up the country to suit their spheres of influence and not with the aim to suit religious or ethnic minorities. The Sykes-Picot agreement in 1916 and the Balfour agreement planted the seeds of friction which could be used by the old colonial powers to their advantage and to the misery of the people in the Middle East.
To me it appears like tectonic plates which have erupted and where it will take some time before that unsettling will find a new equilibrium.
I think the usual notion of a national army as we've seen throughout the 20th century will be revised, unless a global technocratic dictatorship is enforced. In a multi-ethnic (in term of populations, religions, not necessarily races) a national army can be cohesive only if the economic situation allows for it. Otherwise, there would be small mobile armies (think Hezbollah in Lebanon) that can occasionally form alliances when necessary, or federations (think Chechens for instance) if powerful enough. Syria was a pan-arabic socialist experiment that worked more or less in times of plenty but with the economic blockade, constant bombings, natural and agricultural resources confiscated, the nation-state paradigm doesn't make sense anymore. The same could be said of any abstract entity like the European soviet Union or even some nation-states. When the Sh hits the fan, you're loyal to your tribe and family, not to words. OSIT
lilies
The Living Force
As some stated here, all is not that bad now with this new situation in Syria.
The most interesting is now that all various troops factions in Syria are Western supported forces. Will they be magically united now? Or will they jump at each others throats as usual? Which animosity only will serve Russia and China.
Will we now witness Lock Step Obedience by all armies in Syria to Western Command? Same how entire countries bent the knee in time of Covid? Will Turkey fall in line with the West too?
Or as Joe and others stated, there are much more elaborate plans in motion behind the curtains.
For example: Russia going into Syria to kick ISIS out probably was seen as the necessary best move then. But now in 2024 it appears even Syrians don't wanna fight anymore and a significant portion - leadership - welcomed the West since 2012. They saw Russians as not welcome or just endured them after they saved Syria in 2015, probably because of suitcases full of shiny dollars:
Now in 2024, I think that Russian planners are preparing very potent chess moves to get ahead without causing much suffering to the tired Syrian population. Good amount will depend on where Trump meant "Drill baby, drill!" for oil. Also Trump versus BRICS is a big question sign. He vowed to destroy the friendship between Russia and China.
Also a stabilized Ukraine with a stopped war could mean the oil could flow again through the Friendship oil pipeline.
Also note: U.S. Has Stopped Ukrainian ATACMS Strikes On Russia:
Here is Russian journalist, Alexander Kotz's, personal opinion as a good example what he perceived in Syria 12 years ago and this time it looks like he actually managed to tell the truth:
The most interesting is now that all various troops factions in Syria are Western supported forces. Will they be magically united now? Or will they jump at each others throats as usual? Which animosity only will serve Russia and China.
Will we now witness Lock Step Obedience by all armies in Syria to Western Command? Same how entire countries bent the knee in time of Covid? Will Turkey fall in line with the West too?
Or as Joe and others stated, there are much more elaborate plans in motion behind the curtains.
For example: Russia going into Syria to kick ISIS out probably was seen as the necessary best move then. But now in 2024 it appears even Syrians don't wanna fight anymore and a significant portion - leadership - welcomed the West since 2012. They saw Russians as not welcome or just endured them after they saved Syria in 2015, probably because of suitcases full of shiny dollars:
Syrian Army's corruption paired with an appalling lack of professionalism - they learned nothing from the past since 1973 - was noted by a Russian colonel: in 1973 commanders did not participate in the fight only remotely tried to radio-control their units. If their unit lost, they just walked away. Cohesion of command was minimal.
Now in 2024, I think that Russian planners are preparing very potent chess moves to get ahead without causing much suffering to the tired Syrian population. Good amount will depend on where Trump meant "Drill baby, drill!" for oil. Also Trump versus BRICS is a big question sign. He vowed to destroy the friendship between Russia and China.
Also a stabilized Ukraine with a stopped war could mean the oil could flow again through the Friendship oil pipeline.
Also note: U.S. Has Stopped Ukrainian ATACMS Strikes On Russia:
We'll see.
Here is Russian journalist, Alexander Kotz's, personal opinion as a good example what he perceived in Syria 12 years ago and this time it looks like he actually managed to tell the truth:
Last edited:
axj
The Living Force
There is also the possibility that Hamas is being duped by promises for help from the new Syrian "government". Israel may want a reason to invade more of Syria and attacks on Israel from Syria "to support Hamas" may offer just such an excuse.
The only thing that makes this scenario less likely is that the Syrian headchoppers in power now have been presented by the West as "moderate" and "diversity-friendly" revolutionaries. Israel fighting them would go against this narrative, though maybe they just don't care anymore. Same as the cancellation of election results in Romania due to "a possibly Russian campaign on TikTok".
