THE DEFINING MOMENTS; IRAN’S DAY: Ghassan Kadi 24 November 2013

THE DEFINING MOMENTS; IRAN’S DAY:
Ghassan Kadi
24 November 2013

When the war in Syria is over, history will record it in a different manner from the manner in which we experienced it. To begin with, the reader of this epic story will most probably know the end result before reading it, and will not experience the day-by-day waking up every morning to listen and to read about the latest developments.

However, what is pertinent right here and now, today, is this moment in time that will be recorded as another turning point. The epic story will be written in terms of such major turning points, and today will be remembered and this cannot be said and repeated emphatically enough.

Thus far, and as the epic story is still unfolding, let us stop for one moment to see those turning points, the defining moments:

1. The “Arab Spring” starts in Tunisia in mid December 2010. In a few days, it topples its president and starts gaining momentum in Egypt.

2. Mubarak falls on the 11th of February 2011, only 18 days after the “revolution” against him started. Shortly after, Muhammad Morsi the Muslim Brotherhood leader is elected as president.

3. The “Spring” moves west into Libya.

4. The UNSC reaches a mandate to implement a no-fly zone in Libya and NATO starts striking Libya.

5. In March 2011, demonstrators in Daraa Syria take to the streets demanding reform and terrorist elements shoot at them and at Syrian army units.

6. The orchestrated events in Daraa are used as a pretext to launch a propaganda campaign against Syria and flooding it with tens of thousands of militants most of whom were Islamic Jihadists.

7. A coalition comprised of Saudi Arabic, Qatar, and Turkey backed by all Western powers combined was aimed at Syria and specifically against the presidency of Bashar Al-Assad. The coalition included the newly-elected Egyptian president Morsi and even included both sides of the Palestinian political divide.

8. A similar but opposed pro-Syrian coalition was formed comprised of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, and to some extent China.

9. In the meantime, the battle in Libya rages and NATO breaks its UN-given mandate and plays a huge part in bringing down Gaddafi who eventually was killed on the 20th of October 2011.

10. The anti-Syrian coalition sought a UNSC resolution to implement a no-fly zone in Syria. China and Russia vetoed the resolution. The coalition tried several times later, but it is the first veto that will be remembered the most.

11. The fall of Gaddafi gave the anti-Syrian coalition momentum and it banked on a repeat of the story in Syria.

12. The seemingly reluctant Syrian government to turn the clashes into an all-out war encouraged more and more militants to infiltrate into Syria via Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. The militants controlled a huge chunk of Syria, including parts of Aleppo and Damascus and were gaining the upper hand.

13. On the 18th of July 2012 a big explosion in Damascus kills 4 top ranking military personnel including the minister of defence and Assad’s brother-in-law. The militants reach the peak of their might at this point.

14. The battles rages and Syria unleashes its army.

15. For a few months afterwards, both parties (ie the Syrian Army and the militants) make claims that victory is near without any major changes on the battle ground.

16. On the 5th of June, an ominous date for Arabs, but this time it was 2013 not 1967, the Syrian army aided by Hezbollah score a major victory in Qusayr, a strategic position between Damascus and Homs.

17. With more minor Syria army victories, the militants realized that they were losing the ground battle. They needed a shift in their favour.

18. On the 23rd of June 2013, the prince of Qatar abdicates and cedes his throne to his son. His number 2 man Hamad leaves with him. This is seen as a sign of defeat of Qatari policies in Syria.

19. On the 3rd of July, a military coup in Egypt topples the Muslim Brotherhood president Morsi giving Turkey, Qatar and Islamists in general a huge blow.

20. On the 31st of July 2013, Saudi prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the top Saudi anti-Syrian conspirator visits Putin in a desperate attempt to persuade him to change his position. He returns home disappointed and empty-handed.

21. With events turning towards the benefit of Syria in an escalating manner, in August 2013, Saudi intelligence orchestrates a chemical attack in East Ghouta accusing the army of killing children in a desperate attempt to either push for a UNSC resolution against Syria or to at least give the USA enough excuse to attack Syria without a UNSC resolution.

22. Russia stands firm with Syria in the UNSC and within the Moscow-Washington corridors and draws a red line.

23. Washington believes that Moscow is bluffing. Obama orders an attack on Syria. Two missiles were shot from a NATO base in Spain aiming for Syria. The Russians shot one down and diverted the second into the sea.

24. The Russians contact the Americans and tell them they will keep the story hush-hush to avoid diplomatic problems and further escalation and force the Americans into the negotiating position and offer them an olive branch based on Syria surrendering its chemical weapons as a face-saving exercise for the Americans.

25. American foothold in the Middle East is shaken, and America is cornered into accepting to start negotiations with Iran to the shear anger and disappointment of Israel and Saudi Arabia.

26. Yesterday, on the 24th of November 2013, the West concedes that Iran has legitimate rights to seek nuclear power heralding the end of sanctions against Iran.

This is where we are now and today. We shall read the rest of the story in history books, but today is Iran’s day.

Congratulations Iran. Thank you for your support to Hezbollah. Thank you for your support to Syria. Thank you thank you thank you. You deserved today’s great victory.

Bandar and Netanyahu, eat your hearts out.

RUSHING TOWARDS RUSSIA. By Ghassan Kadi

RUSHING TOWARDS RUSSIA
Ghassan Kadi
23 November 2013

As they say, we can only choose our friends, not our family; and this is what human relationships are based on; the choice of who we want to be our friend, business partner or even a spouse.
This is a choice that is considered to be tantamount to freedom and independence, a choice that the right of attaining is something that people fight and are happily ready to die for.

This same fact is also true for groups, tribes, communities and nations.

 

With their diversities in skills and resources, different nations need alliances with other nations to “complete each other’.  Very few nations have the resources and expertise to allow them to stand on their own in this highly developed and competitive world that we live in.  It is this realisation that has pushed the bandwagon of the concept of globalisation and it has probably pushed it a little bit too far. Nonetheless, that push came from a vital need.

 

When political and military conflicts are added to this cocktail, the issue of a nation choosing its own friends becomes very much contingent upon who its enemies are. If we relate this argument to Syria and look at the draconian alliance of its enemies which included all of the Western powers plus Turkey, the Gulf States and Israel just to name the major ones, Syria had no choice but to seek friends and partners with whom it could not only share issues of mutual interest in peace time but also in war time.

Fortuitously, when Syria was looking for friends Russia was in a very similar situation and even though Syria and Russia have had a long standing alliance that goes back all the way to the days of the USSR, this alliance had to be redefined and the boundaries had to be restructured.  After all, this is now Putin’s post USSR and post Boris Yeltsin Russia.

 

A lot has been said about the needs and the interests of Russia in Syria to the extent that we now see vicious and rabid attacks accusing Russia of being a colonialist holding Syria to ransom. The recent oil/gas contract that the Syrian government has granted to the Russians has been like fodder to those Russia hating cynics. What they do not see is that Syria is not rushing towards Russia. This is a natural and normal progression of a long standing alliance that has now fully matured in a time of war.

President Assad has been saying time and time again that once this war is over Syria is going to reciprocate loyalty because now it knows who its friends and enemies are.

If this means nothing to some people and if they see it as a sell-out then perhaps they should consider this other argument. Some argue why not give the contract to Venezuela because they also have the necessary technology and perhaps they might have offered Syria a better financial deal.  People who subscribe to this option seem to forget that this is the Middle East that we are talking about and if we all of a sudden have oil rigs in the sea that are owned and operated by post Chavez Venezuela, a State that is considered by the West as a rogue state, Syria would be giving Israel carte blanche to attack those installation any time, without any notice and neither Syria nor Venezuela would be able to respond to these attacks except by military retaliation.  Having Russia running these operations is an insurance policy that guarantees no scheming zealot will ever dare come near them.

Back to the issue of national alliances; the vocal cynics and critics of Syria’s foreign policies are not offering any viable alternatives. If Syria were to stand alone as some critics seem to suggest, they seem to ignore that Syria would not only have to drill its own natural resources when they don’t have the finances let alone technologies for it, but, Syria would also have to manufacture its own military hardware all the way to tanks and fighter jets and, again, Syria at this stage neither has the finances or the technology to do this.

We forgot something here didn’t we? Syria would have had to use its Syrian made military hardware to fend off a UNSC mandated resolution to attack her because it would have had no Russian Veto to avert this.

Some may rightfully be cynical about the long term viability of the Syrian – Russian alliance and whether or not this alliance will be based on a partnership of equality and mutual respect. No one can give any solid guarantees how this will all pan out in 5, 10 or 20 years from now. What we do know however, is that this alliance, at least potentially, has the hallmark of a long and mutually beneficial collaboration in which Syria will be the new regional oil and gas power and replace Saudi Arabia as a supplier and a kowtower to the West and instead be a true partner to Russia and a sovereign and independent regional power.  

http://213.178.225.235/eng/24/2013/11/20/513504.htm

 

APPEAL TO MEMBERS; RUSSIA AND SYRIA. By Ghassan Kadi 16 November 2013

*Posted to the members of "The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story" which was the first serious and large pro-Syria group which Intibah was an admin of along with Chris Assad and Hiba Kelanee/Syriana/Salaam Shaheen). By mid 2013 we had our first problems with nefarious agents, first the ones sowing doubt about Syria's allies and then thousands of trolls that eventually succeeded in overwhelming the Syrian-Levantine led movement and diverting it.

APPEAL TO MEMBERS ; RUSSIA AND SYRIA
Ghassan Kadi
16 November 2013

There have been a lot of speculations recently about the role of Russia in the Levant, especially after the Syrian Chemical Weapons (CW) deal.

The issue has caused quite a bit of controversy ranging from supporters for the whole Russian intervention including that of the CW deal, to utter rejectionists who regard the deal as tantamount to Syrian surrender and a total Syrian sell-out to Russia.

In some instances, the differences escalated to a level that seems to be increasingly becoming divisive even amongst the ranks of the pro-Syrian camp. This can become a serious matter unless debated openly and rationally. At the moment, this issue seems to be ignored, perhaps in fear of creating divisions. The anti-Russian camp is perhaps feeling marginalized because those who do not support this view (who are by the way the majority) are not debating the matter. In an attempt to clear the air and bolstering solidarity, I suggest that we debate this matter and invite those who have different opinions to make their contributions.

Arabi Souri, is an outstanding member of this group whom I greatly cherish and respect. He has made many significant contributions in exposing the truth about Syria. Most of my thoughts and analyses go hand-in-hand with those of Arabi and I have learnt so much in the past from his input. However, on the issue of the role of Russia I vehemently disagree with his vision.

There is no doubt that Putin is an aspiring world leader and that he sees that Russia has interests in Syria, but to regard the current Russian role as an act of treachery against Syria is totally and utterly ill-founded and there is no evidence to support. In fact, if anything, the evidence points exactly in the other direction.

To be brief and straight to the point, I will outline in dot point the reasons that make me adopt the “pro-Russian” side (if I can refer to it as such):

a. Russia is regaining and restoring its global role. Its first stand was in Georgia back in 2009.

b. Russia made it clear in the UNSC time and time again that it will veto any anti-Syrian resolution, and it did.

c. Russia made clear to NATO that attacking Syria without a UNSC resolution is a red line that will not be tolerated.

d. Russia has never put boots on the ground in foreign nations, not even in Vietnam. Not helping Syria directly is a Russian tradition.

e. The US thought that Russia was bluffing and launched 2 missiles heralding an all-out attack on Syria in early September. Russia thwarted the attack and destroyed one of the missiles, and hacked into the other one and had it diverted.

f. The Syrian CW’s were already an ageing liability.

g. The purpose of weapons CW’s included is protection. Syria’s CW’s performed without having to be fired. They served their role to the highest expectation.

h. The CW deal was a face-saving exercise for the USA and an attempt to find a political resolution, Russia’s and Syria’s way. It was a deal that America was forced to accept, not the other way around. Never before did the USA huff and puff about attacking a country to back off later until Syria. This is the greatest joint Russian Syrian victory ever, and those who do not see it as it is do not have a proper vision of global politics.

i. Russia and Syria want to go to Geneva II when war on the ground is fait accompli. Even Kerry said to Lavrov recently what is the point in going to Geneva after the Syrian Army scores more victories.

j. If Putin is a con man as his adversaries describe him, Assad is not a fool, neither is Nasrallah.

k. For Russia to step up the global ladder, it needed and found strong regional allies. It support for Syria is because Syria proved to be strong.

l. On the other hand, the US allies proved to be weak and worthless and America found itself having to justify to its own people its support for Al-Qaeda.

m. Even without the 2-missiles saga, that is still largely denied, America was very reluctant to strike Syria. It is a nation that is already bankrupt and engaged in many expensive wars.

n. The Anti-Syrian alliance is breaking up. The Emir of Qatar abdicated and his powerful man Hamad had to go with him. Egypt is out of the grip of the Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar and Turkey. Turkey is witnessing internal turmoil and is having second thoughts about its involvement in Syria. The USA knows it cannot strike Syria. Israel is disappointed that the US is having talks with Iran. It is only Bandar who is still trying to pull a trick out of a hat and hope for a miracle that gives him some bargaining edge in Geneva II. None of this would have happened if the Syrian Army didn’t have enough time to deal with the situation on the ground. Had Russia not vetoed the UNSC resolutions against Syria, history would have taken another course.

o. The US and its allies are in a total loss in Syria. They have lost the ground battle, they are divided, and they have lost their initiative and long-term policy. They simply do not know which way to go.

Arabi, in a recent article, argued that all of the above is a façade and that it would be impossible to see Saudi Arabia standing on its own without America. I agree with the second part of this statement. Saudi Arabia cannot stand up on its own and America has no allies left in the region except Israel which will not go into an all-out war with Syria to please Bandar.

Syrian Girl Partisan goes in her anti-Russian rhetoric to the extent of attacking the wisdom and intelligence of President Assad. This is improper, demoralizing and harmful. Again, Syrian Girl has been a very active pro-Syrian activist and she too has played a big role in spreading the truth about Syria. However, her stand on Russia and on President Assad is quite vicious and needless.

My call to Arabi, Syrian Girl and their anti-Russian camp is to have a debate about this subject if they wish. Thus far, this issue has not been handled properly. As a matter of fact, there has recently been a public display of discord among members.

Just because they do not seem to understand the changes in the geo-political order of the world and the rise of Russia (and the BRICS axis in general), some anti-Russian advocates have made some comments about those who support Russia’s role in Syria and branded them as being irrational and naïve. This has been going on for some time and I was hoping it would simply fizzle away, but it only got worse.

This is inappropriate to say the least and should not continue. Any rational discussion is something that we should welcome on this group and any other group provided that it sticks to rationality and refraining from throwing insults and making personal attacks.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/283089981710448/permalink/685189741500468/

*screen shots of  the post are directly below for record keeping purpose but scroll further down for very interesting comments from members are pasted below. Some members, such as Arabi Sour's comments are no longer visible as that particular profile is deactivated.

NETANYAHU'S CHOICES By Ghassan Kadi 21 May 2013

NETANYAHU’S CHOICES
By Ghassan Kadi
21 May 2013

Victory in Syria is looming. It could be a few weeks or even a few days away. But we should not lower our guards and keep fighting at all fronts.

The Anti-Syrian Coalition is now in a deep quagmire, to put it politely. The party who is deepest is no doubt Israel and specifically its PM Netanyahu who has been huffing and pufffing right, left and centre throwing threats around when his “mighty” IDF was unable to stave off even Gaza and when his “Iron Dome” was unable to even stop the home-made Qassam missiles.

Netanyahu has a few choices left, and he hates them all no doubt. He can sit back and abandon his allies in Syria and allow them to get slaughtered. No skin off his nose, after all those who believe they are allies are no more than tools and instruments, and this not only includes the FSA and their cohorts, but also the Gulfies all the way up their hierarchy ranks.

His second option would be to engage in an all-out war with Syria, and he knows well the consequences. He well knows that this will have the potential to drag in all regional powers into the battle field; including Iran and Turkey. He well knows that all Israeli cities will be showered with missiles and that the superiority of his  air force is now in doubt.

The third option is to just shut up and keep redrawing his red-line in order to save face.

The danger is in the fact that this man is crazy and criminal. Will he consider a fourth option and flex his nuclear muscle and use it to restore the myth of the undefeatable army? If he does, the consequences will be much graver than a regional war. But Israel has always maintained that it will use its nuclear power if its existence is under threat. How do they define this threat is yet to be seen.

The inevitable loss of the Islamists in Syria will see a demise in their rising power in the region and the new un-declared Islamist/Israeli alliance will be aborted before it becomes an open reality. The domino effect will follow soon in Lebanon, and this may give King Abdullah of Jordan an incentive to “black-September” them in his kingdom. The MB stand in both Egypt and Tunisia is not looking very good and the Islamist regime in Tunisia is already clashing with the Salafists. But most importantly perhaps, after losing the war in Syria, the Qataris and Saudis will be re-evaluating their policies and alliances and their continued financing to radicalism will most likely stop. If they do not take this decision themselves, they will be coerced to do it because the USA will not allow the Islamists militants to get out of Syria to fight NATO troops elsewhere. If anything, the US will insist that they stay in Syria and get killed there.

Back to Netanyahu, in reality only the use of nuclear weapons in the region can change the new emerging balance of power in the Levant. Netanyahu is not only sitting between a rock and a hard place, but his only escape from this is through a swamp.

Originally published in the Facebook Group, The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story
https://www.facebook.com/groups/283089981710448/permalink/597279670291476/