Russia Begins Operations in Syria: End Game for the US Empire?

[angelburst29]

Russian intelligence report on Turkey’s current assistance to Daesh
http://www.voltairenet.org/article190333.html

Recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters, facilitation of their cross-border movement into Syria and the supply of weapons to the terrorist groups active there.

This report is dated February 10, 2016.

Reportedly, representatives of ISIL — with help from the Turkish intelligence services — have established an extensive network in Antalya for the recruitment of individuals who have arrived in Turkey from the post-Soviet States, to enable their participation in the Syrian conflict and possible transfer to Russia.

The group of recruiters consists of a Kyrgyzstan national named Abdullah; a native of Adygea named Azmet; a native of Tatarstan named Elnar; a Russian Federation national named Ilyas; an Azerbaijan national named Adil Aliev; and a native of Karachay-Cherkessia named Nizam. They are led by a Russian Federation national, Ruslan Rastyamovich Khaibullov (also known as Baris Abdul or by the pseudonym “The Teacher”), born on 1 April 1978 in Tatarstan. He lives with his family in Antalya. He has a Turkish permanent residence permit.

Recruitment takes place with the knowledge of the temporary detention centre administration. If a detainee agrees to accept Islam and engage in terrorist activity, the recruiters promise to “do a deal” with the Turkish law enforcement agencies and offer, free of charge, the services of a Turkish lawyer, Tahir Tosolar. Sultan Kekhursaev, a Chechen who is a Turkish national, has also made visits for the same purpose to detention centres where foreigners are held.

In September 2015 a group of more than 1,000 ISIL fighters who had come from countries in Europe and Central Asia were taken from Turkey to Syria through the border crossing at Alikaila (Gaziantep).

The routes for the movement of fighters pass very close to the Turkish-Syrian border through Antakya, Reyhanlı, Topaz, Şanlıurfa and Hatay.

In March 2014 the head of the Turkish National Intelligence Organization (MIT), Mr. H. Fidan, coordinated the transfer of a large ISIL unit headed by Mahdi al-Kharati, a Libyan national [1]. The fighters were taken by sea from Libya to Syria through the Barsai crossing on the Turkish-Syrian border.

Since late December 2015, with the assistance of the Turkish intelligence services, arrangements have been made for an air route for moving ISIL fighters from Syria through Turkey to Yemen using Turkish military air transport. An alternative means of transporting fighters is by sea to the Yemeni port of Aden.

Russian Federation nationals who maintain contact with representatives of the security, police and administrative authorities in a number of Turkish cities, including Istanbul, are involved in recruitment through Turkish madrasas.

It is well known that wounded ISIL fighters are being provided with places to rest and receive treatment in areas of Turkey bordering Syria. At least 700 fighters were recuperating in Gaziantep in 2014.

Reportedly, beginning in 2015, Turkish intelligence services assisted in the removal from Antalya to Eskişehir of what was termed a “Tatar Village”, which houses ethnic Tatar fighters and accomplices of the terrorist group Jabhat al-Nusrah who are natives of Tatarstan, Bashkortostan and Mordovia. Some of them are dual Russian-Turkish nationals.

One of the people actively involved in the Village is Timur Maunirovich Bichurin, a Russian national born on 15 December 1969 who is a native of Kazan and since January 2014 has been acting as an accomplice, helping Islamists fighting in Syria.

In December 2014, Turkish intelligence services helped to set up camps in Turkey, particularly in Hatay Province, to gather illegal migrants and provide training in preparation for the dispatch of extremist gangs to Syria. In January 2015, the Turkish MIT was involved in the operation to merge three terrorist bands, Osman Gazi, Omer bin Abdulaziz and Omer Mukhtar, into a group called the Sultan Abdulhamid Brigade, of which Omer Abdullah was appointed commander. The members of this group are trained in a camp in Bayır-Bucak in Turkey under the leadership of instructors from special operations units of the Turkish Armed Forces general command and MIT personnel. The activities of the Sultan Abdulhamid Brigade are coordinated with the activities of Jabhat al-Nusrah fighters in the north of the Syrian province of Latakia.

It is well known that on 21 September 2015, in the Syrian town of Tell Rifaat, representatives of the Syrian opposition who had received military training at a camp in Kırşehir in Turkey had delivered weapons to Jabhat al-Nusrah fighters.

Deliveries of weapons to terrorist groups in Syria are reportedly still taking place, profiting from the facilities of Turkish-based foundations İnsan Hak ve Hürriyetleri ve İnsani Yardım Vakfı (IHH — Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief), İmkander and Öncü Nesil İnsani Yardım Derneği.

Supplies of various forms of weapons, military equipment and ammunition are arriving from abroad via the Turkish port of İskenderun. Military equipment and supplies are transported from there through Hatay Province (Öncüpinar border crossing) to Aleppo and Idlib in Syria using vehicles belonging to IHH, İmkander and Öncü Nesil with the following Turkish registrations: 33 SU 317, 06 DY 7807, 33 SU 540, 33 SU 960, 42 GL 074 and 31 R 5487. Within Syria, the weapons and ammunition are distributed to Turkmen gangs and Jabhat al-Nusrah units.

On 15 September 2014, representatives of IHH brought supplies of weapons and medicines from Bursa through the Ceylanpınar border crossing (Reyhanlı district) by vehicle into Syria for ISIL groups. This shipment was followed and escorted through Turkey by a vehicle carrying MIT personnel.


Experts: Invasion of Syria Could Lead to Nuclear War
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/02/experts-invasion-syria-lead-nuclear-war.html

The Threat of Nuclear War Is Now HIGHER Than During the Soviet Era

Turkey previously shot down a Russian jet.

Now, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are threatening to invade Syria.

How dangerous could this get, in a worst case scenario?

Robert Parry – the investigative reporter who broke the Iran-Contra story for the Associated Press and Newsweek – wrote yesterday:

A source close to Russian President Vladimir Putin told me that the Russians have warned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan that Moscow is prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons if necessary to save their troops in the face of a Turkish-Saudi onslaught. Since Turkey is a member of NATO, any such conflict could quickly escalate into a full-scale nuclear confrontation.

Washington’s Blog asked one of America’s top experts on Russia – Stephen Cohen , professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University, and the author of a number of books on Russia and the Soviet Union – what he thought of Parry’s claim.

Cohen said: Parry is a serious man [“serious” is the highest compliment that an insider can give to someone]. I cannot say it will lead to nuke war, but it is very dangerous, as is quadrupling US/NATO forces near Russia’s borders.

Pavel Felgenhauer – a leading Russian military analyst – also believes that a nuclear war is “very likely” to arise from Russia’s skirmishes with Turkey in Syria.

Last December, U.S. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard – a Member of the House Armed Services Committee, Iraq war veteran, and Major in the Hawaii Army National Guard – warned that U.S. policy in Syria could lead to a nuclear war. And see this.

Also in December, retired Lieutenant General Robert Gard, chairman emeritus of the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, retired Brigadier General John H. Johns, professor emeritus from US National Defense University, and Leslie Gelb, president of the Council on Foreign Relations penned an article in Foreign Policy calling for US-Russia cooperation to de-escalate current tensions and diffuse the increasing worrisome nuclear blustering.

American security expert Bruce Blair – a former nuclear-missile launch officer – notes that Turkey’s downing of the Russian warplane at the Syrian-Turkish border “fits a pattern of brinkmanship and inadvertence that is raising tensions and distrust between Russia and US-led NATO,” and that “this escalation could morph by design or inadvertence into a nuclear threat.”

Blair writes that the threat of nuclear war is higher now that during the Soviet era:

Russia has shortened the launch time from what it was during the Cold War. Today, top military command posts in the Moscow area can bypass the entire human chain of command and directly fire by remote control rockets in silos and on trucks as far away as Siberia in only 20 seconds.

Why should this concern us? History shows that crisis interactions, once triggered, take on a life of their own. Military encounters multiply; they become more decentralized, spontaneous and intense. Safeguards are loosened and unfamiliar operational environments cause accidents and unauthorized actions. Miscalculations, misinterpretations and loss of control create a fog of crisis out of which a fog of war may emerge. In short, the slope between the low-level military encounters, the outbreak of crisis and escalation to a nuclear dimension is a steep and slippery one.

(Indeed, the U.S. and Soviets came within seconds of all-out nuclear war on numerous occasions. And only the courage of U.S. and Soviet individuals to say no when their superiors told them to fire nuclear weapons – in the face of mistaken readings – saved the planet from nuclear war.)

Russia expert Stephen Cohen agrees that the risks of nuclear war are much higher than people know, telling the Commonwealth Club last year that the threat of nuclear war with Russia is now greater than it was with the Soviets.

Former U.S. Secretary of Defense William Perry agrees that the risk of nuclear war is higher than during the Soviet era.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author=angelburst29]A source close to Russian President Vladimir Putin told me that the Russians have warned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan that Moscow is prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons if necessary to save their troops in the face of a Turkish-Saudi onslaught. Since Turkey is a member of NATO, any such conflict could quickly escalate into a full-scale nuclear confrontation.[/quote]

Of-course tactical nuclear weapons will be deployed. They obviously didn't get the memo at first when Putin spoke how he hoped that nuclear weapons would not be necessary against ISIS. This wasn't per se aimed at ISIS I think but more to the allies of ISIS in the region who dare to intervene.

Russia is outnumbered against a full blown invasion in Syria and she has no intention of letting herself simply be overrun. This exact scenario is where tactical nuclear weapons are designed for in the first place.

Europe better keeps its own and US nuclear arsenal under control inside its own borders. If the US inside Europe succeeds in firing just one tactical nuclear weapon at the Russians chances are that the whole of Europe would flame up.

The C's said that in the end, the world will hate the US as Nazi Germany once was at the end of the war. This means they are going to screw up big time. Instigating a nuclear war with the intent of leaving themselves unscratched may be it.

There is a difference between tactical and strategic nuclear weapons. Strategic nuclear weapons are meant to level cities. If the US doesn't launch any nuclear weapon from its own soil and pretends it plays no role in the conflict they could gamble that Russia doesn't launch any against the US. But if a tactical nuclear weapon is launched from Europe secretly done by the US (blaming France most likely) it could leave the continent in ruins. Only the US would come out as a winner.

 

[angelburst29]

'Foreign Policy' Can't Seem To Locate Sergei Lavrov
Mark Galeotti laments the fictional demise of our grumpy uncle, Sergei Lavrov

http://russia-insider.com/en/foreign-policy-cant-seem-locate-sergei-lavrov/ri12931

Remember when Vladimir Putin “disappeared”? Well, much like the daytime soap opera that is Western Russia analysis, Foreign Policy is trying to recycle that plot. Mark Galeotti had every opportunity to tell Business Insider at that time that Putin had not, in fact, disappeared, but he chose instead to stir the pot.

Undaunted, Galeotti has now decided that, not content with oppressing, well, everyone, Vladimir Putin is now, like, being a total jerk to his bro, Sergei Lavrov.

...at last weekend’s Munich Security Summit, the usually commanding Lavrov was visibly uncomfortable. He even faced boos and mocking laughter as he tried to sell the world on Russian policy in Ukraine.

Yes, a few NATO kindergartners felt compelled to heckle Lavrov during his speech at Munich. Lavrov, however, remained cool and composed, and reminded those assembled that they were responsible for illegally bombing Yugoslavia and Libya. Funny stuff! Read Lavrov’s hilarious speech at Munich here.

This isn’t the first time Lavrov has been treated like a punchline: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s chief Russia analyst Brian Whitmore scornfully suggested in January that, given the direction his foreign service career appears to be headed, Lavrov always has a second career as a comedian or a fiction writer ahead of him. (As it so happens, Lavrov actually writes poetry, and apparently has even done some improv comedy.)

Whitmore has been taken to task by formidable Russia expert Gordon Hahn for his, quite frankly, neurotic and inconsistent Russia analysis. And Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty is, as we all know, funded by the U.S. government. What happened to Galeotti's past thoughtful analyses? Anyone who watched the Munich conference could clearly see Lavrov was at the top of his game.

On the one hand, Lavrov is simply another casualty of the Kremlin’s current attitude toward professionals in government. Since his return to the presidency in 2012, Vladimir Putin has surrounded himself with a tighter and tighter circle of friends and cronies, while marginalizing those who’ve spent years running the country.

Or perhaps Lavrov is too busy to bother with entertaining FP and is concerned with, I don’t know, serious stuff. Like North Korea:


Moscow unconvinced North Korea tested a hydrogen bomb - Lavrov

Russia says Sergei Lavrov discussed North Korea Rocket Launch with Japan’s Fumio Kishida

Lavrov to pay official visit to Japan in mid-April

And Syria:

A telephone conversation between Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukri took place on February 17 at the Egyptian minister’s initiative.

The ministers exchanged opinions on the progress of the Syrian settlement in keeping with decisions adopted at the International Syria Support Group meeting in Munich on February 11. They stressed that they remain focused on ensuring that the task forces formed by the International Syria Support Group in Geneva continue their work in the interests of a ceasefire and the improvement of the humanitarian situation in Syria.

I guess nuclear proliferation and the Syrian settlement aren’t serious enough topics for the best darn news team ever over there at Foreign Policy. Or maybe they don’t have Google. Or access to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Twitter account. Maybe ISIS can hook them up with some internets.

Since Lavrov seems to still be employed (phew!), let’s haul out some established Putin fan fiction:

He has even physically withdrawn, increasingly governing not from the Kremlin, but from his palace at Odintsovo, outside Moscow. (Read: secret lair with underground villain retreat)

There was that whole meeting with the Hungarian prime minister where they discussed full-on Hydra stuff, like fighting terrorism, and peace in Syria and Ukraine. But, who cares what Putin is actually accomplishing? If he’s not sitting in a straightjacket somewhere foaming at the mouth, Western Russia commenters aren’t interested. I mean, Putin’s crazy and isolated, right? That’s why he conducts phone calls with the American president. And quite correctly calls out the EU on its Russia sanctions.

Long story short: Putin and Lavrov are both still working, so fear not, Mark! I'm sure Uncle Sergei will be back soon to tell those damn kids to get off his lawn.

Maybe it would be easier for these helicopter-parenting Western journos to keep better track of these two if they had them microchipped.

 

[SeekinTruth]

LOL! The tosh that these western "journalists" spew is the best illustration of what is described in Political Ponerology as schizoidal psychopathy.

 

[sitting]

This recent in-depth write up on Sott is well worth a careful read. Both in terms of historical background -- and the present shifting of strategies.

http://www.sott.net/article/312572-The-anatomy-of-a-third-World-War-Neocon-style

The only thing I would add, is the possible element of deception.

This conflict -- like conflicts of previous generations, may in the end be a manifestation to distract. As the C's have reminded repeatedly ... the real threat (to humanity,) is "not over there, but out there."

Something wicked this way comes -- and they don't want us to look.

I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[sitting]

Strategic nuclear weapons are meant to level cities.

Maybe not.

First and foremost, their purpose is to scare an opponent sh##less. But if some crazy decides to go ahead anyway, these weapons may then be "deactivated" -- by higher authority (ET's.) And apparently this has been forcefully demonstrated in the past.

But I could be very wrong.

FWIW.

 

[Cosmos]

Strategic nuclear weapons are meant to level cities.

Maybe not.

First and foremost, their purpose is to scare an opponent sh##less. But if some crazy decides to go ahead anyway, these weapons may then be "deactivated" -- by higher authority (ET's.) And apparently this has been forcefully demonstrated in the past.

But I could be very wrong.

FWIW.

I think anyone who has followed the actions and exact words of Putin and staff the last couple of years understands that they consider any kind of real deployment of nuclear actions, as a very remote and last option.

They have plenty of other military tools that they can use, which do not destroy the environment and kill so much innocent people, as a nuclear weapon does.

The fact that they have a huge nuclear arsenal and are proud about it and use it as defense/scaring mechanism, is something different. In the world today, it would have been foolish (and frankly speaking stupid) for the russians to not get up to speed in that regard rather fast. Especially because they noticed early on, that the US-Empire is primarily looking for any way to bring russia under their full control.

So Putins statements about atomic bombs and ISIS, have to be viewed in that context. It was probably a message towards the west saying: "Don't forget that we are a big nuclear power, so back of with your terror nonsense".

A scaring statement basically.

 

[seek10]

Here is a southfront analysis on the ineffectiveness of Turkish invasion into Syria. This also goes into comparing before russian intervention and current situation. Though this video ignored possibility of NATO getting dragged into War by mad sultan it is a interesting take.
http://southfront.org/russia-defense-report-russian-military-grouping-in-syria/#/?playlistId=0&videoId=0

 

[angelburst29]

LOL! The tosh that these western "journalists" spew is the best illustration of what is described in Political Ponerology as schizoidal psychopathy.

When I first began reading the article, my impression was that it was "a satire piece on Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov"? Digging deeper into the contents, I searched for the original article by Mark Galeotti for comparison - which can be found here:

Argument Free Sergei Lavrov! Russia’s foreign minister has been reduced to a shadow of his formidable (and irascible) self. Why won’t the Kremlin put him to better use?
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/17/free-sergei-lavrov-putin-russia-syria/ By Mark Galeotti February 17, 2016

What the author Lisa Marie White at Russia Insider was trying to point out in her article - was that Mark Galeotti is a spin-doctor, professional propagandist from the Halls of Washington - that twists and distorts "facts" while demoralizing and inflicting character assassination on his intended victims. Schizoidal psychopathy does characterize his writing style in numerous postings of his articles.
Putin seems to be his main target, while distorting facts and perception. Guess, Galeotti was getting bored with writing the same-old
garbage and decided to take a pot-shot at Lavrov.

Mark Galeotti - is Clinical Full Professor of Global Affairs at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University. He is an expert and prolific author on transnational crime and Russian security affairs.
http://www.kyivpost.com/one-editorial/mark-galeotti

Biography - Mark Galeotti is academic chair of the Center for Global Affairs and is a specialist in transnational organized crime, security affairs, and modern Russia. His principal focus is the development of organized crime and its impact on national and international security. Galeotti has worked as a researcher in the British Houses of Parliament and in the City of London. In addition, he has taught at Rutgers University in Newark and at Keele University in the United Kingdom. Galeotti served as an advisor to the British Foreign & Commonwealth Office and has worked with a wide range of commercial, law enforcement, and government agencies from the U.S. Department of State to Interpol. At NYU-SCPS, Galeotti coordinates the transnational security concentration and teaches such courses as Hard Power: The Uses and Abuses of Military Force, Transnational Crime, and Intelligence and Counterintelligence.
http://sce.nyu.edu/faculty/faculty-profile.html?id=12946

He’s the founding editor of the journal Global Crime (formerly Transnational Organized Crime ), was the European Editor of Low-Intensity Conflict & Law Enforcement , and is also a member of the editorial boards of Crime & Justice International and The Journal of Power Institutions in Post-Soviet Societies.

His books include the edited collections ‘The Politics of Security in Modern Russia’ (Ashgate), ‘Russian & Soviet Organized Crime’ (Ashgate) and ‘Global Crime Today’ (Routledge) and he is a regular contributor to Jane’s Intelligence Review, Oxford Analytica and many other outlets. He writes a regular column, ‘Siloviks & Scoundrels,’ for the Moscow News.
http://www.wikistrat.com/experts/dr-mark-galeotti/

 

[sitting]

Strategic nuclear weapons are meant to level cities.

Maybe not.

First and foremost, their purpose is to scare an opponent sh##less. But if some crazy decides to go ahead anyway, these weapons may then be "deactivated" -- by higher authority (ET's.) And apparently this has been forcefully demonstrated in the past.

But I could be very wrong.

FWIW.

I think anyone who has followed the actions and exact words of Putin and staff the last couple of years understands that they consider any kind of real deployment of nuclear actions, as a very remote and last option.

Hi Pashalis,

I want to make clear by "crazy" I was NOT referring to Putin.

It's the other "crazies" that this man has to contend with.

That said, I do think the use of tactical nukes is possible ... and perhaps allowed (by the higher authorities.) And in the case against Turkey, it wouldn't be the targeting of civilians. But maybe a threat to "light up" every major military base inside Turkey for instance.

That would be a meaningful deterrent, in my opinion. But the possibilities are endless ... and the Turks know it.

I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[angelburst29]

Report: Syrian Army Completes East Aleppo Cauldron; 800 ISIS Fighters Trapped
SAA seizes last key village along Aleppo-Raqqa highway, trapping almost 1,000 ISIS terrorists
http://russia-insider.com/en/military/report-syrian-army-completes-east-aleppo-cauldron-800-isis-fighters-trapped/ri12964

Islamic State fighters are commonly referred to as 'ISIS rats' on the internet. That unflattering designation may have gone from being one of mere pejorative to one being literally true.

It is being reported that the Syrian Arab Army has seized the last remaining village along the Aleppo-Raqqa Highway, thus completing the encirclement of 800 ISIS members in East Aleppo and trapping them like, well, rats.

It is an especially cruel and ironic twist of fate for these sad souls as a great number of them were no doubt part of the siege of the Kuweires airbase located in the same region. The Syrian Army somehow managed to hold out for 18 grueling months until Russian air power eventually broke it down in November 2015.

If the encirclement is as complete as is being reported, ISIS is in for a very painful experience. There is nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. No one will be coming to help them and there is no escape. There is just the wait. Waiting under Russian jets and surrounded by an enraged army - an army so many members of which were subjected to some of the most appalling war crimes imaginable. With ISIS' limited skills in negotiation, this could be a very harsh and brutal end of the road.



Tiger Forces complete the east Aleppo encirclement: 800+ ISIS fighters trapped
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/tiger-forces-complete-the-east-aleppo-encirclement-800-isis-fighters-trapped/

The Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS) is falling apart in the east Aleppo countryside after weeks of fending off the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and their allies from taking the strategic Aleppo Thermal Power Plant.

Over the course of 72 hours, the Syrian Arab Army’s “Tiger Forces” – backed by Liwaa Suqour Al-Sahra (Desert Hawks Brigade) and the Cheetah Forces “Team 3” – have been steadily advancing west along the imperative Aleppo-Raqqa Highway in order to complete the east Aleppo encirclement. However, the ISIS terrorists in the Al-Bab Plateau and the Al-Safira Plains were not going to concede any territory to the government forces without a violent battle.

Determined to complete the encirclement, the Tiger Forces launched a vital assault to capture the last village located between their positions along the Aleppo-Raqqa Highway and the Jibreen District of Aleppo City. The assault proved successful as the Syrian Armed Forces imposed full control over Umm Turaykiyah in the Al-Safira Plains.

The assault proved successful as the Syrian Armed Forces imposed full control over Umm Turaykiyah in the Al-Safira Plains. As a result, 800 ISIS terrorists that were fighting the Syrian Armed Forces at the strategic city of Al-Safira and its nearby village of Tal ‘Aran found themselves encircled for the first time in this war. The 800 ISIS terrorists have no outlet to retreat and they have no available supply lines; this means, they will either surrender to the Syrian Armed Forces or fight till the death.



Kremlin regrets UNSC denies support to Russian draft resolution on Syria
http://rbth.com/news/2016/02/20/kremlin-regrets-unsc-denies-support-to-russian-draft-resolution-on-syria_569569

The Kremlin regrets the UN Security Council's refusal to support the Russian resolution on Syria, Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov has said.

"All we can do is to express our regret that this draft resolution has not been supported," he told reporters.

Russia will carry on the consistent, transparent and clear course towards stability, the fight against terrorism and preservation of Syria's territorial integrity, Peskov said.

The day before, Russia submitted to UN Security Council members a draft resolution on support for Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity in connection with Turkish actions as regards Syria.

Six members of the Security Council, including the UK, the United States and France, rejected the Russian draft resolution.



NATO warns Turkey it can't count on support in a conflict with Russia as tensions escalate (Photo - Video)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3455934/Nato-warns-Turkey-t-count-support-conflict-Russia-tensions-escalate.html

European diplomats have warned the Turkish government that it cannot count on the NATO support should the conflict with Russia escalate into an armed conflict, according to German media.

But Russia, which has been carrying out air strikes in support of main regional ally Bashar al-Assad, has voiced its opposition to the operation. It also called on the Security Council to press Turkey to halt its shelling of Kurdish forces in northern Syria - but it was rejected.

Turkey's plan was based on the assumption that, in case of conflict, the country could invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty, the collective defence clause if any member state is attacked.

But Luxembourg foreign minister Jean Asselborn told German magazine Der Spiegel that the Turkish government cannot count on Nato.

'NATO cannot allow itself to be pulled into a military escalation with Russia as a result of the recent tensions between Russia and Turkey,' he said.

Asselborn also stressed that Article 5 can only be invoked when a member state is clearly attacked.

A German diplomat echoed Asselborn's stance and said: 'We are not going to pay the price for a war started by the Turks.'

On Friday, French President Francois Hollande also said that Europe needs to prevent a conflict between the two nations.

'There is a risk of war between Turkey and Russia,' he said in an interview with France Inter radio.



Why NATO Expected to Lose Most of Europe to Russia
Cold War lessons on the promise—and nuclear peril—of escalation.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-nato-expected-lose-most-europe-russia-15267

A recent RAND wargame on a potential Russian offensive into the Baltics brought talk of a “new Cold War” into sharp focus. The game made clear that NATO would struggle to prevent Russian forces from occupying the Baltics if it relied on the conventional forces now available.

These wargames have great value in demonstrating tactical and operational reality, which then informs broader strategic thinking. In this case, however, the headlines generated by the game have obscured more about the NATO-Russian relationship than they have revealed. In short, the NATO deterrent promise has never revolved around a commitment to defeat Soviet/Russian forces on NATO’s borders. Instead, NATO has backed its political commitment with the threat to broaden any conflict beyond the war that the Soviets wanted to fight. Today, as in 1949, NATO offers deterrence through the promise of escalation. (Article continues at site.)



Iranian Chief of Staff Cautions Candidates to Distance Themselves from US, Britain
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13941201001236

Addressing a group of military academics in Tehran on Saturday, Firouzabadi said, "Foreign meddling in Iran’s elections is an insult. The bitter reality is that the US-British media outlets are interfering in the election process. They support certain candidates and speak against others. It’s an indecent campaign and indeed an insult to the intelligence of the Iranian voters. It goes against the country’s independence and sovereignty.”

“This is a hopeless and useless move. However, it still angers the Iranian nation, as the colonial powers are still giving themselves the permission to indulge in such ugly activities,” he added.

Firouzabadi urged the Foreign Ministry to take the necessary measures in this respect and voice its strongest objections to the US and British governments, noting that “meddling in the election process of an independent nation is like invasion that must be dealt with accordingly.”

On February 26, Iranians will go to the polls to elect candidates for the next parliament as well as 88 jurisprudential experts out of more than 800 prospective candidates for the 5th Assembly of Experts.

The Assembly of Experts elections will also be held on the same day. The 88 members of the Assembly will also be directly elected. The winning candidates of the Assembly of Experts' next term, lasting until 2024, possibly might have to choose the next Supreme Leader of Iran, or at the very least plan for it.

Meantime, the Persian service of the BBC has launched a campaign to encourage Iranians to vote for reformists and avoid sending Principlists to the parliament and Experts Assembly.

Last week, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said in a speech, "As before, we insist everyone, even those who don't believe in the system and the leadership, come to the ballots, as the election belongs to the nation, and the system."

 

[angelburst29]

Turkey Is Now Waging a Proxy War Against US in Syria
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/turkey-now-waging-proxy-war-against-us-syria/ri12955

What do you call it when a foreign power blasts the hell out of a group you've created, trained and equipped?

There is no other word for it. Turkey is now waging a proxy war against US in Syria. It has always been clear that Turkish and American interests in Syria do not necessarily match, but until now Turkey had refrained from using its military to blast those contrary US interests to high heaven.

That's all changed now that it has emerged that Turkey is now bringing its military force to bear not only against its old enemy the Syrian Kurds, but also an allied formation that is a US creation from the get-go.

In Syria US has always had two problems. The first problem was that whichever non-jihadi "Free Syrian Army" groups it created, trained and equipped these as a rule were quickly pressured by Al Nusra to disband and their weapons and fighters incorporated into the rebel military structure controlled by Al Nusra. Try as it might – except in the south on the border with Jordan – US could not establish a meaningful Syrian rebel network of its own (and eventually "got around" the problem by simply funneling resources into the one controlled by Al Qaeda).

Secondly, in its slow motion war against ISIS it found that having shunned Assad the only forces who could possibly act as its boots on the ground were the Kurds. However, the usefulness of Kurds is limited firstly because they are not necessarily interested in dying en masse to eject ISIS from areas they can not hope to ever make part of their Syrian Kurdistan region. And secondly, because Syria's majority Sunni Arabs are not necessarily thrilled to see the Kurdish YPG take over military control of more of the country.

Thus enter the "Syrian Democratic Forces". Almost certainly midwifed into existence by the US they are a heavily YPG-dominated coalition of Kurdish and Arab militias (as well as some Assyrian, Armenian and reportedly Turkmen). The SDF upholds the "Free Syrian Army" brand, but is at the same time at war with the Al Nusra-controlled rebel mainstream. And given that the powerful YPG is a part of it, it actually has the strength to keep Al Qaeda at bay.

The SDF thus hypothetically offers the US a way out of its two major conundrums in Syria. Under Kurdish protection US-trained FSA formations can actually survive and their survival in turn makes the SDF something else than a solely Kurdish outfit thus hopefully making its gains into majority Arab-populated regions less offensive to Arab Syrians, and also the group itself more willing to bleed to capture such areas (eg Raqqah) from ISIS.

Of course, all of this is rather optimistic – it hinges on the ability of finding Arab Syrians willing to sign up for an enterprise that is intent on fighting ISIS, standing up to Al Qaeda, and proclaiming opposition to Assad all at the same time. And furthermore doing it under the patronage of Kurdish nationalist YPG which is not necessarily making itself many friends among non-Kurds in areas it holds. This is a tall order indeed, but it is what the US has opted for since October 2015.

The strategy has had some success. A number of non-Kurdish militias in north-eastern Syria have signed up for the enterprise – the major reason for this is probably because the Assad government has only a very weak presence there and can therefore not offer meaningful logistical support. However, by signing up for the SDF and flying FSA flags, the assorted anti-ISIS Arab, Assyrian and Armenian outfits can receive arms from the United States.

Meanwhile in north-western Syria a number of non-jihadi rebel groups united in the "Army of Revolutionaries" that were originally trained by the US (basically the remnants of the once much more significant non-jihadi FSA in the north) have also signed up for SDF and have been apparently playing a very useful auxiliary role in the Kurdish assault against Al Nusra (AoR's bitter enemy which had hounded it out of the mainstream rebellion) in the Azaz pocket.

So far so good – except for one little detail – Turkey is doing its utmost to stall and rebuke the SDF advance, including pounding it with artillery. So here is the situation we have: the US comes up with an idea on how to finally create a proxy army for itself in Syria that is neither ISIS, nor Nusra, nor Assad (nor overtly Kurdish nationalist) and the Turks do everything in their power to blow it the hell up.

It's clear why the Turks are doing so – SDF advances complicate their Kurdish issue and they certainly don't want the retardation of their Al Nusra proxies in Syria. Ideally they would destroy SDF as a viable US proxy army in Syria and force Washington back into putting its weight (solely) behind the Al Qaeda-controlled rebellion which they are backing themselves.

However, the fact that Turkey has different interests in Syria than the US is not new. Neither is the fact that Turkey will always put its interests above those of the US. What is new, however, is that in pursuit of its own interests Ankara is willing to wage a veritable proxy war against the US in Syria.

What is even more shocking is lack of response from the United States. Washington's foreign policy is now so confused and lethargic that Ankara will very likely be allowed to get away with bringing its military might to bear against very close US proxies.

Now it is true that Turkey does so, not to defeat the US in Syria, but merely to get it to shift its policies, however, any other self-respecting global hegemon would have been able to explain to its very junior allies that blasting its assets is not an acceptable way of going about that.

In some ways US is the most powerful empire the world has ever seen, but in others it is constantly ridden roughshod over – not by its enemies, but by its allies; Israel, Saudi Arabia, and now Turkey.



NATO general admits Russia fully controls aviation of international coalition
http://www.pravdareport.com/news/world/16-02-2016/133341-nato_general_russia-0/

Lieutenant-General of the German Air Force Joachim Wundrak said that Russian fighter jets regularly accompany German Tornado planes on their reconnaissance missions over Syria.

Wundrak told the Rheinische Post, that such encounters occur professionally, without any incidents. The official said that the Russian aircraft do not intercept the German planes.

According to him, Russia uses its state-of-the-art fighter jets, such as the Su-35S, for the operations. According to the German defense official, the actions of the Russian Air Force can be regarded as acts of "political demonstration".

The Russian Air Force makes it clear that "unlike international coalition forces, Russia is acting at the request of the legitimate Syrian government," Joachim Wundrak said. Germany joined the anti-terrorist operation in the skies over Syria on December 2015 as part of the international coalition. Two German fighter jets were deployed on Incirlik airbase in Turkey.



U.S. Airstrikes in Afghanistan Are Killing Civilians at Greatest Rate in Seven Years
http://www.newsweek.com/us-airstrikes-afghanistan-killing-civilians-427877

In what could point to decreased accuracy in targeting or a possible shift in the rules of engagement, the rate at which civilians are being killed by United States airstrikes in Afghanistan is now at its highest point since 2008, an analysis of newly published United Nations data reveals.

On average, one civilian was killed for every four drone or jet strikes in 2015—up from one civilian death for every 11 attacks the year before, and the first time the casualty rate has risen since 2011, according to research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The rate was last at such levels at the height of the Afghanistan War in 2008, when one civilian was killed for every three attacks.

The rates were calculated using civilian death tolls compiled by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) for its annual report and from official U.S. Air Force data on the number of strikes it carries out in the country.

In its latest annual report, published this weekend, UNAMA says there were 103 civilian deaths from U.S. air actions in Afghanistan in 2015. Although these deaths are slightly more than the 101 recorded in 2014, they came from a third as many airstrikes. While there were 1,136 airstrikes in 2014, this number fell to 411 in 2015—the first year after the withdrawal of most U.S. troops.

The sudden increase after so many years of falling casualty rates has raised concerns that military targeting is becoming less accurate or that there might have been an unannounced change in the rules of engagement.

With the mounting pressure on the U.S. to increase the number of air attacks in Afghanistan to push back the Taliban, observers feel these concerns are particularly urgent.

[...] Since combat operations were declared over at the end of 2014, the U.S. has been carrying out three types of strikes in Afghanistan: counterterrorism strikes against Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State group (ISIS), actions in defense of U.S. or NATO forces, and, in extremis, air support to Afghan forces. Prior to 2014, the figures provided by the U.S. Air Force for airstrikes included a relatively small number by its coalition allies.

Most U.S. troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan by the start of 2015. Around 6,000 U.S. troops remain there as part of a multinational operation training mission, along with a 3,000-strong counterterrorism force.

In 2015, the Taliban pressed forward, capturing towns and killing large numbers of Afghan security forces. There is now growing pressure on the Pentagon to start offering air support to Afghan forces.

Experts fear the Afghanistan conflict will intensify in 2016.



A Warning Before Injecting U.S Military Force Into Libya Again
http://www.nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/warning-before-injecting-american-military-force-libya-15244

As violence worsens in Libya, many senior U.S. officials and opinion leaders are warning that the president must order “decisive military action” lest the Islamic State continue to gain influence there. Yet there is almost no evidence to suggest using force in Libya will improve the situation—and plenty of examples in the past two decades to suggest that it would do just the opposite: Afghanistan 2001-present, Pakistan (drone war, 2005-present), Iraq (2003-11, 14-present), Yemen (drone war, 2009-present), Libya 2011 and Syria 2014-present—the violence and instability in every single one of those locations is far greater today than it was before we intervened militarily.

Even Libya itself shows the dangers of military action. The deteriorating situation there was in large measure made possible by America’s ill-advised airstrikes in 2011. Foreign Affairs declared last March that the U.S. intervention in Libya “was an abject failure, judged even by its own standards. Libya has not only failed to evolve into a democracy; it has devolved into a failed state.” The Associated Press reported on Monday that officials in Algeria and Tunisia have suffered attacks on their soil emanating from Islamic radicals in Libya, yet both “fear Western military intervention will exacerbate the problem.”

[...] But would Human Rights Watch, or anyone else who studied Qaddafi-era Libya, argue that its people are now better off? Without a doubt, the political, security and humanitarian situations in Libya are all profoundly worse today than before Western military intervention. Diplomacy, however, has just recently scratched out at least a ray of hope.

On Sunday, after a fractious and contentious process, a UN-backed Presidential Council finally announced that a revised national unity government had been agreed upon, and the list of ministers would now be submitted to the internationally recognized Parliament for a vote. One of the Council’s members, Fathi al-Majbari, said of this tenuous agreement, “we hope that this will be the beginning of the end of the conflict in Libya.”

Sometimes, as hard as it is for many to accept, the most effective way to safeguard American interests and minimize human suffering is to withhold using deadly force and, instead, redouble our diplomatic might.


2 Serbian embassy staff kidnapped by ISIS killed in US bombing in Libya
https://www.rt.com/news/333082-us-raid-libya-serbians-killed/

Two Serbian embassy staff abducted in Libya were killed on Friday during a US airstrike on a suspected Islamic State training camp, Belgrade has confirmed. Their deaths came just as ransom negotiations had got underway with the kidnappers.

Embassy communications chief Sladjana Stankovic and her driver Jovica Stepic were killed by a US bomb targeting the camp in Sabratha, Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic told journalists on Saturday.

Sladjana Stankovic and Jovica Stepic were abducted in the northwestern coastal city of Sabratha on November 8, 2015, when their car was hijacked by gunmen after becoming separated from a convoy carrying Serbia’s ambassador to Libya.

The Friday airstrike carried out by the US in western Libya reportedly killed more than 40 people. The Pentagon said the strike was targeting Noureddine Chouchane, the Tunisian suspected of masterminding the deadly attack on the Bardo Museum in Tunis in March, 2015.

While the US claimed the bombing was a major success, it has also found itself on shaky legal ground, as the strike may have been carried out without any legal justification.

The circumstances of the two Serbs’ alleged deaths are reminiscent of those of Italian Giovanni Lo Porto and American Warren Weinstein, who were killed by an alleged US drone strike on a Taliban compound in January, 2015.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova offered deep condolences to the families of Sladjana Stankovic and Jovica Stepic, and urged the US and NATO to be more responsible in choosing their targets.

 

[angelburst29]

“The Story is Over, The Game is Over”: Syria’s Ambassador al-Ja’afari on Turkey, Saudi, Qatari, ‘Israeli’, NATO war on Syria
https://ingaza.wordpress.com/2016/02/18/the-story-is-over-the-game-is-over-syrias-ambassador-al-jaafari-on-turkey-saudi-qatari-israeli-nato-war-on-syria/ (Photo - Video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PRXjyf8Bbo (35 minutes)

February 18, 2016 - Below is a very interesting recent series of statements, followed by Q&A with Syria’s Ambassador to the UN, Dr. Bashar al-Ja’afari on turkey’s latest criminal aggression against Syria, as well as turkey’s history of violating Syria’s sovereignty and abetting, funneling terrorists into Syria. Below are some choice remarks by Dr. al-Ja’afari*

“Nowadays everybody knows what’s going on in Syria. The turkish government is responsible of dealing, trading with ISIL. Buying oil, gas, and artifacts from ISIL. Facilitating the movement of this illegal, illegitimate trade of artifacts and gas and oil through turkish territory into some european capitals and ‘israel’.

So the story is over, the game is over. The turkish wrong and irresponsible policies are very well known to everybody. It’s time to put the turkish rulers at the seat of confession in front of the Security Council.”

*
“The whole war against (Syria) is a war crime and a war against humanity. The economic boycott–taking the form of unilateral economic coercive measures for 5 years. Blockade. All kinds of boycott has been implemented by these aggressive countries towards my government–by the way, they are the same countries supporting the armed groups, the terrorist groups, operating in Syria and Iraq.

Definitely we have credible information that the so-called US led alliance struck the hospital in the northern part of Syria, but as usual the easiest way for them is to trigger a hostile campaign against the Syrian government–within the media–to accuse and defame the Syrian government, or our allies the Russians, of doing so and being behind such criminal act against a hospital.”

*
“Which ‘opposition’? We have 1000 ‘oppositions’.”

“You cannot be a genuine national opposition while supporting the ‘israeli’s’ policies in the south, and the turkish policies in the north, and the saudi’s policies in the eastern and south of Syria. Whatever this ‘opposition’ you are referring to, it should defend the interests of the nation, not the interest of the saudi arabia, or qatar, or turkey, or anybody else.”

*
“Both the Secretary General (Ban Ki-Moon) and especially (inaudible- Mistura ?) have tried to cover up the Riyadh delegation irresponsible position during Geneva talks. They should have disclosed to the public that the Riyadh group was responsible for adjourning the indirect talks.

…I was there, I talked to de Mistura and he explained to me himself that he decided to suspend the talks because he knew earlier that the Riyadh group decided to withdraw from Geneva before even engaging in the indirect talks.

So he decided to save what he called the ‘dignity’ of the United Nations and his own dignity by blaming himself, rather than blaming the Riyadh group. Of course, he wouldn’t have been able to blame the Riyadh group because otherwise he would have to face the westerners’ and the saudi and the qatari and the turkish blackmailing…”

*
“The delegation of the Syrian Arab Republic was the only delegation to engage twice with the special envoy. Other delegations did not even go to the Palais des Nations in Geneva. The special envoy was unable even to form delegations of “oppositions” to deal with the delegation of the Syrian Arab Republic. We didn’t know where are these ghosts we are supposed to deal with. We didn’t know how many delegations there should be there. We didn’t know the names. In the last couple hours before we left Geneva, the deputy of Mr. de Mistura came to me at the hotel and gave me a partial list of names, not the full list of names….”

*
“Who is supporting the terrorists? And who is giving them all these sophisticated weapons to counter the Syrian Army advances everywhere in Syria? Those who are behind the terrorist groups are getting hysterical because of the Syrian Army advances everywhere, at all the fronts.

The turkish regime has even allowed terrorists to smuggle sarin gas, recently–just yesterday-and I forwarded this information to Security Council members.

…We are very concerned with regard to this irresponsible behaviour, mainly speaking by this trilateral criminal alliance: turkey, saudi arabia and qatar.

The Turkish government …is behind a flagrant aggression against the sovereignty of my country. This is why all the member states today expressed their concern. Many of them condemned the turkish escalation and the turkish aggression against the sovereignty of my country.

…The story is over, no more secrets any more.”

 

[angelburst29]

U.S. Airstrikes in Afghanistan Are Killing Civilians at Greatest Rate in Seven Years
http://www.newsweek.com/us-airstrikes-afghanistan-killing-civilians-427877

The U.S. Top Military Brass - may have another problem in Afghanistan - if that Country gets hit with a sizeable Earthquake?

Note: This article first appeared in the Washington Post, a day ago but the little buggers would not allow me to read it on their site - for I had already indulged in my "5-free-articles" for the month .... so I found it here:

Afghanistan's US-funded 'Pentagon' at risk in major quake, report finds
http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/afghanistan-s-us-funded-pentagon-at-risk-in-major-quake-report-finds-1.394731

When the next major earthquake hits Afghanistan, could it leave the leadership of the Afghan military buried under five stories' worth of rubble?

John F. Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, does not rule it out. In an audit set for release Thursday, Sopko said the new $155 million Afghan military headquarters, funded by U.S. taxpayers, may not withstand the Big One.

"Although the building generally met contract requirements and appears well built, we found some construction deficiencies that may have safety implications . . . in the event of an earthquake," the inspector general wrote to U.S. military leaders.

Sopko was referring to engineering standards that call for the foundations of large buildings to be segmented, allowing movement to be diverted in multiple directions. That would lessen the chance of large structures shaking to the point of collapse.

In this case, the new jewel of the Afghan military — a structure often referred to as the Afghan Pentagon — does not even meet the standards of the American Society of Civil Engineers, the report says.

The document is the latest question to be raised about how the United States spent more than $68 billion in funding for Afghan security forces since 2001, including $6 billion for bases and buildings.

When the new Defense Ministry headquarters was proposed in 2009, it was slated to cost about $49 million.

But the project encountered numerous delays and cost overruns, in part because the Afghan military kept adding new features to the project. By 2014, the project had become so expensive that the U.S. military had effectively run out of money to complete it, prompting a stop-work order.

But Congress replenished the funds, and the building was completed this past summer. The 516,000-square-foot structure features a 1,000-seat auditorium, state-of-the-art command-and-control centers, a dining hall, a library and conference rooms.

But Sopko said the lack of adequate structural support represents a glaring oversight, considering Afghanistan's history of significant earthquakes.

As any resident of Kabul can attest, there can be multiple jolts in a single week.

In the past four months, the maze of fault lines in northeastern Afghanistan produced two earthquakes with a magnitude of 6 or greater, including a 7.5-magnitude temblor in October. In 2002, a 7.2-magnitude earthquake flattened dozens of buildings in Kabul.

"We found separation joints that were (1) not continuous or aligned vertically; and (2) were spanned with nonstructural systems, such as drain pipes, on the inside of the building without flexible connections," the report says in part. "These deficiencies could compromise the building's ability to withstand ground motion caused by seismic activity."

Brig. Gen. Dawlat Waziri, chief spokesman for the Afghan Defense Ministry, declined to comment on the report, except to say that Afghans are not blame for any structural deficiencies.

"It was built by their own people," Waziri said, referring to the United States. "We had nothing to do with it."

In a written response, the U.S. military agreed with another key finding in the report — handrails in stairwells were not built high enough — but did not comment on the building's likely structural stability during a major earthquake.

After the earthquake in October, which spared Kabul from major damage because it occurred at a depth of more than 125 miles, a large crack appeared on one of the building's exterior walls. The inspector general said that, overall, the building did not sustain "significant damage."

"However, given Kabul's location in an active seismic zone, we remain concerned about the extent to which the MOD headquarters building would withstand an earthquake with an epicenter closer to Kabul or of greater magnitude," according to the report.

 

[Voyageur]

“The Story is Over, The Game is Over”: Syria’s Ambassador al-Ja’afari on Turkey, Saudi, Qatari, ‘Israeli’, NATO war on Syria
https://ingaza.wordpress.com/2016/02/18/the-story-is-over-the-game-is-over-syrias-ambassador-al-jaafari-on-turkey-saudi-qatari-israeli-nato-war-on-syria/ (Photo - Video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PRXjyf8Bbo (35 minutes)
...

Thanks, watched the video too.

In light of what is known to be going on, there was this article on SoTT the other day that makes reference to Iraq's Mosul area and its dam, written by F. William Engdahl. Going back, RT referenced on SoTT also brought this up (2014). Pepe Escobar also in 2014 discussed Israel and the Kurd's.

What's certain is that wishful thinking - from Tel Aviv to Washington - will keep permeating calculations about the Kurdish question, as in assuming Turkey will be allowed accession to the EU (it won't) and thus Kurdistan will be the EU's de facto eastern border. Bordering what? A Sunnistan across the Levant? Over the Pentagon's collective dead body, of course.

What Big Oil in the US - and also Israel - sees, most of all, is the mirage of a Western-friendly major oil exporter in the long run. That's why Balkanization sounds so juicy. This has nothing to do with the welfare of the historically wronged Kurdish people. It's hardcore business. And yet another Divide and Rule power play. Expect plenty of hardcore moves ahead.

Much of this got me thinking about the water question in Turkey, which is a massive control tap on the downstream users; Syria, Iraq and even Jordon - always Israel, although not in a direct line of the water courses.

The Kurd's in Turkey represent a very large eastern/northern influence both historically and in population - and in areas of water course development (dams and hydroelectric). The PPK have always been a point of contention for Turkey over Turkish dam's. So its no secret that Turkish water policies have created aggravating conditions over the last half century, and it has not stopped having been ratcheted-up.

By John Daly (vol. 7, no. 16 of the Turkey Analyst) {2014} http://www.turkeyanalyst.org/publications/turkey-analyst-articles/item/343-turkey%E2%80%99s-water-policies-worry-downstream-neighbors.html

Turkey’s Water Policies Worry Downstream Neighbors

As armed conflict ravages Syria and Iraq, Turkey risks adding to the social and political tensions to its south by cutting the water flow of the Euphrates, which originates in southeastern Turkey and is Western Asia’s longest river, to downstream states. Compounding Iraqi misery, the Islamic State (IS) has been using water as a weapon of war. As unrest continues to roil the Fertile Crescent, whether water is used as a tool of inconsiderate state policy or a weapon of war, the suffering of civilians and farmers has dire political consequences. What is certain is that Turkey’s ambitious GAP program is adding to the misery of the downstream populations.

There is more background on this from the link (and many other books, papers and articles), and of the dam's themselves, including the GAP network within the Turkish steeps. Of the Dam at Mosul, Escobar pointed out:

The dam, the largest in Iraq, could be used as "a weapon of mass destruction," experts have warned, alluding to its capacity to hold back 11-12 billion cubic meters of water, as well as to produce 1,000 megawatts of electricity.

This dam is just one of many, so the corridor that encompasses edges of Syria, Iraq and Turkey (with its oil too), is of importance. The Turks have paid out $30 something billion for the GAP Dam systems, and the water spigot has always been in their control over its downstream users. There is a whole bunch of complicated historical lens that can be applied and modern time endgames that I don't know where they are headed. Anyway, just keeping the water question on the burner for possible updates.