Monday, February 26, 2018

WHO IS DOING WHAT IN SYRIA Part II : Syria Grabs the Intiative. By Ghassan Kadi 26 February 2018

Who is Doing What in Syria Part II: Syria Grabs the Initiative.(Also in Portugese)
By Ghassan Kadi 26 February 2018
With developments happening at such a fast pace in Syria, who is doing what is an ever changing story. Here is Ghassan Kadi’s latest take.
http://thesaker.is/who-is-doing-what-in-syria-part-ii-syria-grabs-the-initiative/

This article was also published by ZeroHedge
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-11/who-doing-what-whom-syria-and-why

Who is doing what in Syria, part II: Syria grabs the initiative

19304 ViewsFebruary 26, 2018 35 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi for the Saker Blog

In my previous article (http://thesaker.is/who-is-doing-what-in-syria-and-why/), I expressed my take on the highly unlikely possibility of an all-out war in Syria. As a matter of fact, I had been expressing this very same view for years, against all war-mongering theories that implied that America was just one step away from leveling Syria to the ground,

http://thesaker.is/war-on-syria-not-quite-according-to-plan-part-3-a-usa-unable-to-bomb-syria/

This is because I had always believed that Syria is not like any other nation that America has engaged in war with; Syria has rockets that can reach Israel, and this is in itself a deterrent that other nations did not have. If this reality formed the foundation of what became a solid alliance between Syria and Russia, then we should not be at all surprised.

To say that this deterrent has been as effective as otherwise Syria having a nuclear arsenal would not be an over-statement. And finally, President Assad himself has recently made it publically known, and for the first time from the horse’s mouth; not mine, that should American troops in Syria attack Syrian troops, then Syria will retaliate by attacking Israel:

http://www.addiyar.com/article/1496230-الرئيس-الاسد-سيضرب-اسرائيلاذا-ضربت-اميركا-الجيش-السوري

This serious announcement did not make news headlines in the West, as a matter of fact, it is very hard to find any evidence of it in the mainstream English press and even alternative media.

With all the above said, a “smaller” war seems more inevitable, but who is going to pull the first trigger and draw first blood? It will either have to be a madman asking for potential big trouble, or someone sure of his capabilities and knowing that should the fight escalate, he’ll be in a position of advantage.

If Netanyahu had the slightest hope in winning a relatively small confrontation with Syria, without allowing it to escalate into a big war, and if it did, he would turn it into a win, then there is no better timing for him to do it than now. After all, he is engulfed in corruption charges and Israelis are taking to the streets demanding his resignation. Nothing could save his face as much as a war, limited or otherwise, but one that he knows he could win. However, given the recent downing of an Israeli F-16 with a relatively archaic SAM-5, not to mention the thousands of rockets poised to be launched at Israel in such an event, this makes Netanyahu less likely to make such a gamble any more than a down-trodden bloodied boxer asking for a rematch before he recovers from his knockout.

The situation in the south of Syria therefore remains unchanged, and is likely to remain so, even if a limited war is to escalate in the north where American and Turkish troop have infringed illegally upon Syrian sovereignty.

However, the two hot spots are not totally unrelated as a direct escalation between Syrian and American forces WILL involve Israel as previously expressed.

So what are the Syrian troops doing moving into the American-held Syrian city of Manbij?

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201802251061966101-sdf-pass-territory-syrian-army/

Incidentally, just a few days ago, Syrian Army units entered the Syrian city of Afrin, and which has been under Turkish attack for a month or so, without any significant advances on the Turkish side. What is interesting here is that the people of Afrin welcomed the Syrian Army brandishing posters of both of President Assad and Kurdish leader Ocalan:

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201802231061920457-afrin-militia-rally-celebration/

Such scenes are pleasing for Syrians who seek national unity. After all, and regardless of what has been said in support of or against Syria’s Kurds, they are Syrian citizens, and they come from a lineage that is thousands of years old, and history has this fact well and truly documented.

By moving Syrian troops into Afrin and having them greeted in the manner that they have been, Syria is giving Erdogan a number of messages; one of which may knock some sense into him.

First of all, Syria is saying to Erdogan that Afrin is Syrian territory. Secondly, the people of Afrin are saying to Erdogan that they are loyal to Syria. In between the lines, Erdogan may see that Syrians are getting united, despite of their ethnicities, and if he pulls out without a fight, he may save himself a needless battle; because the union of Syrian people means that an independent Kurdish state is not on the agenda; or at least, not any more.

But the Syrian troops are also planning to move into the Syrian city of Manbij, and Manbij is not like Afrin, because in Manbij, there are American troops who did not pull out despite a formal Turkish request for them to do so:

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/top-u-s-general-says-no-manbij-troop-withdrawal-1.5770199

Turkey did not make any move towards Manbij after America’s refusal to pull out. Turkish troops are still bogged down in Afrin, unable to score any victory, hence unable to even think of deploying more forces or planning the next steps. But Syria is not asking the same of America; she has decided to deploy her troops and move in. After all, Manbij is Syrian territory and the American presence there is illegal and Syria does not need to seek America’s approval to move Syrian troops into Manbij anymore than America needs to seek Syrian approval for moving American troops into California.

We go back to the initial question. The party to pull the first trigger and draw first blood, even in a limited war, will either have to be a madman asking for big trouble and huge potential ramifications, or someone sure of his capabilities.

The way it seems, Syria has never been in a better position for a long time; despite all the damage and carnage and enormous human suffering.

We do not know what happens behind the scenes, and for the Syrian Government to be able to contain the Kurdish aspiration for separatism and be able to keep Syrian Kurds under the roof of Damascus, was never ever expected to be an easy task.

The Kurds who are separatists, and not all of them are, have played their game and failed. Without a crystal ball that sees what goes on behind the scenes within the closed doors of Kurdish elders, it seems clear that a consensus has been reached to dump the idea of separatism, endorse and welcome the Syrian Army, and stand up against the Turkish incursion in Afrin. The current presence of Syrian troops in Afrin and the welcome they received by the locals is a living testimony.

Has a similar deal been reached between the Kurdish elders and the Syrian Government regarding Manbij? The answer to this is most likely to be affirmative. Syrian troops will not enter Manbij to fight with its civilians. They will only move in after they have reached a level of national reconciliation that allows such a move and gives the troops the same welcome potential as the one they received in Afrin.

So what will happen to the American troops stationed in Manbij when Syrian troops move in?

The answer to this question will depend on the manner in which American troops respond to the advance to Syrian troops into Manbij that is illegally-held by American troops.

In brief, Syria is presenting herself, and seemingly for realistic on-ground reasons, to be in a position of solidarity, decisiveness and determination to impose her sovereignty on her entire territory.

In making those moves against the illegal presence of both Turkey and America on her soil, Syria is not in real terms asking for a fight with either Turkey or America. However, Syria is saying to both nations that Syrian territory is Syrian and should either Turkey or America stop Syrian troops or attack them as they exercise their legitimate and UN-endorsed right of Syrian sovereignty, and should either one of them attempt to stop Syria from implementing her rights, then Syria will have no other choice but push the intruders back, forcefully if needed.

Sadly, the US Government has had the history of responding to such similar moves in terms of body-bag count. And the post WW II human American toll has been borne by under-privileged young Americans. No one in his right mind within or outside the United States wants to see mothers of American soldiers, who joined the force in good faith, greet their sons and daughters back home in body bags.

If we cannot relate to the fears and apprehensions of those mothers, we cannot claim to be human. Whether those mothers understand the reality behind the wars their sons and daughters have been put into in order to fight is another story altogether, but in reality, the onus of the fate of their sons and daughters is on the decision makers of America.

Much has been said and written recently about sending American troops in Syria back home in body bags. I would rather see them walk back home after their leaders make the right decision.

The way it is in Syria however, American policy makers are putting American troops in harm’s way with odds that stack up against them unless their government decides to evacuate them, and soon.

America should look back at the Vietnam experience and leave Syria, now, and without any further delay. With or without Russian support, if all Syrians, including Syrian Kurds get united, and they seem to be doing so, America will lose all the local support base; a prelude for America to move out before it is too late.

In reality however, America has nothing to gain being in Syria, unless it is able to achieve a real strategic objective; something it currently lacks.

So who is doing what in Syria now?

America does not seem to know what it is doing, who is her ally and adversary.

The Kurds seem to have seen the light

The Syrian Government seems to have established a Damascus-based umbrella for the main Kurdish issue.

Turkey is unable to achieve any military objectives and in the absence of a plan for a Kurdish state, Turkey will no longer “need” to be in Syria fighting Kurds. And last but not least, should America dig its heels in and refuse to leave Syria peacefully and engage militarily with the Syrian Army, not only they are poised to lose, but the heat will move south and Israel will pay the price.

In Portuguese
http://www.orientemidia.org/quem-faz-o-que-na-siria-22-siria-assume-a-iniciativa/?fbclid=IwAR2gpj-l5VFHrCkpFNzUTFdM_j-9mdHIrBsfWz28674aQi_62EPHdcjGLEE

Sunday, February 11, 2018

WHO IS DOING WHAT IN SYRIA AND WHY. (Also in Portugese) By Ghassan Kadi 10 February 2018

Who is Doing What in Syria and Why.  
By Ghassan Kadi 10 February 2018

In a time of great confusion where it is difficult to determine who is doing what, especially in the presence of many theories and reports, some of which cannot be further from the truth, Ghassan offers a sombre insight and outlook.

http://thesaker.is/who-is-doing-what-in-syria-and-why/



https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-11/who-doing-what-whom-syria-and-why
Who is doing what in Syria and why
42841 ViewsFebruary 10, 2018 73 Comments
by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog
It seems that every time a chapter in the war on Syria comes to an end, a new factor surfaces. Just like the 1975-1989 civil war in Lebanon before it, and which started off with a clash between the PLO and the Lebanese rightwing Phalangist militia and then ended up with an Israeli invasion and its aftermath, the war on Syria is now a totally different war from the one that started seven years ago.
With other players gone or having their roles changed, the only persisting player is the Syrian Army of course, fighting here for the integrity and sovereignty of Syria. We cannot include its allies, because even its allies have changed.
There is much speculation about recent events, a lot of war and fear-mongering, but if all elements of the current powers on the ground are dissected and analyzed, it becomes very easy to see what is going on and who is doing what.
Before we try to understand who is doing what and why, let us first identify who are the main players on the ground and behind the scenes; past and present. This is a short list:
Syria of course
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
Kurds
Turkey
Iran
Hezbollah
Israel
the USA
 Russia
Notwithstanding the inevitable continuing role and presence of Syria and popular national Syrian allied forces in the war against her, we must acknowledge that Saudi Arabia and Qatar have already played their role and walked away as losers. For the sake of historic documentation, this had to be mentioned even though they do not have much of an influence and clout at all at present.
Kurds are playing a role that cannot be discussed without acknowledging the role they played between 2011 and 2015/16. Kurdish fighters, separatists or otherwise, have upheld Syrian border integrity in Syria’s north from as early as 2011 when the Syrian Army had no allies on the ground. And even though the Syrian Army and Kurdish fighters did not fight physically within the same trench, the Kurds fought fiercely in the north, holding their ground, against Turkish-facilitated incursions and against ISIS later on.
However, as Kurdish separatist movements were established and as they were not preemptively contained under the roof of Damascus, something had to give.
Kurds who are separatists will do anything and make deals with anyone to make their dream come true. History has shown that they are prepared to join hands with America and even Israel.
It must be acknowledged however that Kurds who are not separatists, and there is no way of telling their percentage any more than there is a way of telling the percentage of those who are, do not seem to have much of a voice in their community. Furthermore, seemingly there isn’t an all-inclusive nationally-endorsed rationale where they can address their concerns against those who are separatists and in a manner that can allay their fears and apprehensions as a minority group in such a way that would quell their desire for independence.
Turkey’s role has been changing with the tides in the last seven years. From wanting to topple the Syrian Government and Erdogan praying at the Omayyad Mosque as the conqueror of Damascus, Erdogan is now in a much more humble damage-control mode hoping to at least be able to prevent the formation of a Kurdish state south of his borders. The turn of events in the war, and the bargain plea reconciliation he has had with Russia after Turkey downed a Russian Su-24 in Nov 2015 has put Erdogan in that position. But Erdogan, the compulsive Islamist and nationalist, will always try to look for opportunities to turn and stab anyone in the back because his dreams of a great Turkey-based Muslim sultanate are bigger than any deal and treaty he signs with anyone.
That said, Erdogan will not settle for any outcome that will mean the establishment of a Kurdish state. Unless the tides change in his favour, it is highly unlikely that he will change course and demand more.
In effect, the war in northern Syria is more or less totally separate from the one heating up in the south with Israel.
Iran: The Syrian theatre has brought Iran physically closer to Israel in a manner that opened up a new border line that is bigger than the one Hezbollah has in Southern Lebanon. Israel does not have the reciprocal privilege. That said, whilst Israeli presence is not officially recognized in states like Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, there is little doubt that the Eastern coast of the Persian/Arabian Gulf is under Israeli direct or indirect control in more ways than one.
That said, it must be remembered that Iran’s issue with Israel is doctrinal and not territorial.
In brief, Iran’s military presence in Syria is in adherence to the common defense treaty it has with Syria, but it is also aimed at protecting Iran’s own interests and establishing military presence and rocket-launching capabilities that are only a few kilometers from major Israeli cities in comparison to the one thousand or so kilometers that separate Israel from Iran, or at best a couple of hundred that separate the east coast of the Persian/Arab Gulf from Iran’s southern cities.
Given that Iran is not a nuclear power and Israel is, based on the above, any conventional military confrontation with Israel will put Iran in a position of advantage.
Iran’s status in Syria can be either seen as offensive or defensive vis-à-vis Israel. Most likely, it is defensive, and Iran is unlikely to use its Syrian-based positions to initiate an unprovoked attack on Israel given Israel’s nuclear deterrence.
Hezbollah: In more ways than one, ideologically-speaking, Hezbollah is an extension of Iran. But strategically-speaking, Hezbollah is a part of the Lebanese political process. Moreover, Hezbollah’s issue with Israel is both doctrinal, and territorial.
Hezbollah went into Syria to defend Syria of course, but in defending Syria, Hezbollah was defending itself and Lebanon.
The supply lines for Hezbollah came from Syria, and this is no secret. But even if Hezbollah had to establish alternative routes after seven years of war, Hezbollah remains dependent on Syria for ensuring the depth of its survival and ability to fight. Even if Hezbollah went further and managed to establish its own military manufacturing base, and this is not unlikely, it remains entwined with Syria at levels that are essential for its survival and continuity.
Ideologically, Hezbollah is perhaps closer to Iran than any other ally, but strategically, it cannot be closer to any other ally more than Syria. To expect Hezbollah to yield to pressure and withdraw from Syria prematurely is tantamount to expecting North Korea to surrender its nuclear arsenal.
Israel: It wouldn’t be surprising to say that the post-Kissinger USA has left Israel feeling secure and privileged to the extent that it was able to coerce the world’s single superpower to rubber-stamp what suited it; even if it was against the interests of that superpower.
However, with all the support America gave Israel, Israel was not able to find peace, real lasting peace. Military superiority and peace are two different things, and America was able to provide Israel with the former, but not the latter.
But even that military superiority that meant once upon a time that Israel was untouchable has been eroded. The rise of Hezbollah to power in a manner that enabled it to bomb “Haifa and beyond” in July 2006 has sent shivers down the spines of Israeli military strategists.
Israel now has no idea what to expect if and when another military escalation ensues with Hezbollah and it is bracing for the worst.
Given the latest confrontations with the Syrian air defenses, Israel seems to be in a similar position in not knowing what to expect from Syria either.
The USA: In all what the USA has done in supporting the initial Saudi/Qatari/Turkish attack in the war on Syria, it achieved nothing more than defeat after defeat.
If there was ever a time during the last seven years for America to launch a major attack on Syria, it would have been done on the pretext of a chemical weapon attack allegedly perpetrated by the Syrian Army on Eastern Ghouta, but Obama did not take the Saudi-orchestrated bait. If Obama took a single and somber decision for which he will be positively remembered once all the dust has settled, it will have to be his decision not to attack Syria in early September 2013.
But Trump’s America inherited a Syria in which America has no presence or influence. The ailing nation cannot be seen to be standing still doing nothing about this.
Russia: Discussing the role of Russia was left till the end because to emphasize once again, as per previous articles, that the role of Russian diplomacy is becoming increasingly important in Syria and the Levant in general.
To put all of the above into a realistic perspective, there is a potential war brewing in southern Syria, a war that has little to do with the one raging in the north, and only Russia has the potential of dealing with the conflict.
There is no speck of doubt in my mind that Russia has a Middle East peace plan.
There is no doubt in my mind that Russia wants to catapult America out of its role as the Middle East peace talk negotiator; a role that it played for more than four decades now without any scores on the board.
It must be remembered that despite all the concessions PLO leaders gave Israel, America was unable to provide any peace to Palestine, and not even to Israel for that matter. It is highly likely that even Israel is growing tired of America’s elusive promises of peace; and the peace Israel was promised was based on quashing the axis of resistance and establishing toothless puppet Arab regimes that dance to America’s tune, and who would normalize relationships with Israel and not pose any threat at all, not now, not in the future.
So Russia is strengthening her position in the Middle East in preparation for the opportune moment to elevate herself to be accepted by all parties concerned as the single arbitrator who is capable of negotiating an all-inclusive deal.
The rest is simply posturing.
The recent escalation between Syria and Israel is not a prelude for a bigger war. Nobody wants a war; not right now, as they are all aware of the damage that can be inflicted upon them.
Israel keeps testing the waters, testing Syria’s air defense capabilities, and above all, testing Russia’s resolve and determination to create a true balance of power in the Middle East.
Some Arabs would be disappointed that Russia would not allow the total destruction of Israel, but Russia has never promised this. On the other hand however, Russia is pushing Israel to be realistic, and has never promised Israel total and unconditional support like the USA did since the days of Kissinger.
Unless Israel can safeguard itself against Hezbollah rockets, and which it can’t, it will never initiate an all-out war with either Syria, Hezbollah, or both; not forgetting the Iranian presence on the ground in Syria, just outside Israel’s borders.
Israel has to either accept that the rules of the game have changed, or risk an escalation that will inflict huge damage on its infrastructure and civilians. The recent downing of an Israeli F-16 by Syrian air defenses and the subsequent call Netanyahu made to Russian President Putin is a clear indication that Israel is not happy with the fact that Russian arm supplies to Syria are changing the balance of power.
An astute look at recent events can only propose that Russia is trying to drag Israel into peace talks that are based on a regional balance of power, but Israel is not convinced yet that it has to do this anymore than it is convinced that it has lost its military upper hand. On the other hand, Russia will find it very difficult to convince Syria, Hezbollah and Iran that they should have any peace at all with Israel. All the while, America realizes that it has no presence in the war in the south, and is using the Kurdish pretext to have “a” presence in the north in order not to miss out on being party to any settlement. Erdogan is doing his bit to prevent the creation of a Kurdish state in Syria. Other than that he has no role to play in the potential brewing conflict in the south. At the end, America will stab the Kurds in the back like it did many times earlier, the Kurdish aspirations for independence will be pushed back for many decades, and the real focus will be on the south, on Russia’s yet undeclared role and plan for a Middle East peace plan.

In Portuguese
http://www.orientemidia.org/quem-faz-o-que-na-siria-22-siria-assume-a-iniciativa/?fbclid=IwAR2gpj-l5VFHrCkpFNzUTFdM_j-9mdHIrBsfWz28674aQi_62EPHdcjGLEE

Thursday, February 8, 2018

RUSSIA'S NEW PREEMPTIVE MOVE IN LEBANON By Ghassan Kadi 7 February 2018

Russia’s New Preemptive Move in Lebanon
By Ghassan Kadi,

7 February 2018

It seems that there is a new development in the region with a possible Lebanese-Russian deal.
Here are Ghassan Kadi’s thoughts on it.

http://thesaker.is/russias-new-preemptive-move-in-lebanon/

Also published here:
https://tonyseed.wordpress.com/2018/02/14/russias-new-pre-emptive-move-in-lebanon/

Russia’s new preemptive move in Lebanon

22244 ViewsFebruary 07, 2018 18 Comments

by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog

Russia has put herself, for better or for worse, in a position that requires a huge role in the Levant; perhaps much bigger than what Russia bargained for on the eve of the Russian “intervention” in Syria on the 28th of September 2015.

The initial Russian-led attack on ISIS in Syria was highly successful until a glitch was added to the picture when Turkey downed a Russian Su-24 a few weeks later in November 2015.

Turkey was immediately faced by Russian sanctions and before too long, Erdogan, the man who never apologized for past mistakes, did eventually make his apology personally to President Putin. Putin accepted the apology, but in reality Erdogan made it clear to Russia that for the Russian initiative to succeed and succeed smoothly, it has to be based on acknowledging Turkey’s presence and interests.

That said, Erdogan’s apology to Putin is an acknowledgment of the former of his position in the pecking order.

As Russia and Turkey agreed to the principle of joint effort, Turkey became a partner in the team led by Russia, and which included Iran, as the nations that stood behind the Astana talks. All the while, Russia had to play the diplomatic role of keeping Damascus and Ankara at arm’s length given the key anti-Syrian role Erdogan has played in the war on Syria.

Even as Turkish troops are currently conducting a major offensive on Syrian Kurds on Syrian soil, Russia has managed to stave off direct confrontation between Syria and Turkey.

Putting the Turkish so-called “Olive Branch” operation aside, and notwithstanding how potentially dangerous it is, it can arguably be said that Turkey is as much under control as feasible. Russia now seems poised to play a much bigger regional role. After all, the return of Russian diplomacy and presence in the Levant is highly likely to include a wish on Russia’s side to replace the United States as the Middle East peace negotiator. After the USA ousted Russia from the joint role back in the mid-seventies, Russia is now coming back with force. Add to this the fact that American diplomacy has failed and given the Arabs, and Palestinians in specific, nothing in return for the many concessions they offered. If anything, the recent acknowledgement of Trump of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is probably going to be the last straw, and with this decision, Palestinians will no longer sit with Americans on any negotiating table.

So not only is Russia coming back into the Middle East with strength and determination, but also the USA is creating a huge void to be filled.

But for Russia to be the new and good “Big Brother”, she will have to find a way to curtail Israel, just like she did with Turkey.

Recent developments have been pointing to conflict between Lebanon and Israel, a conflict that can turn into a war that has thus far been avoided since July 2006.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-natgas-lebanon-israel/israel-lebanon-clash-over-offshore-energy-raising-tensions-idUSKBN1FK1J0

The outspoken and rather radical minister is often an embarrassment even to the staunchest supporters of right wing politics in Israel itself.

It is not surprising therefore that Hezbollah responded to Lieberman’s claims and threats by counter threats saying that should any offshore Lebanese infrastructure by targeted by Israel, Lebanon (ie Hezbollah) will retaliate by targeting Israeli offshore infrastructure.

http://www.almanar.com.lb/3332228

We have all heard this tit-for-tat jargon many times before, but the new development here is that apparently the Russian Government has approached the Lebanese Government for military and security cooperation. According to Naharnet, a reliable Lebanese source, the two countries are not far from signing a formal agreement:

http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/241895

According to an article written by Salam Al-Obeidi and published on Al-Mayadeen, the proposed joint collaboration goes further. Al-Mayadeen is normally a reliable source, but what it published a few hours ago has not been corroborated elsewhere. According to Obeidi, the Russian Government is seeking an unprecedented level of military cooperation with Lebanon. (http://www.almayadeen.net/news/politics/857565/لماذا-الآن–لبنان-يفتح-مطاراته-وموانئه-أمام-الطائرات-القتالي/).

This is the English translation:

“Russia’s PM’s office advises the Lebanese Ministry of Defense of its willingness to sign a treaty for military cooperation between the two countries. This treaty includes, among other things, conducting joint military exercises and joint usage of airports and seaports of both countries that will facilitate access to fighter jets and warships on each other’s territory. The Russian government’s decision comes in response to the rising tension between Lebanon and the “Israeli entity” that is planning to build a concrete wall that goes beyond the “blue line”. Add to this the Israeli claims of ownership of “block 9” that is rich in both oil and gas and, which is in Lebanese economic waters. So what is behind the current Russian decision? Russia has taught us in the last decade or so that all that pertains to matters of energy resources, especially in the area between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea is considered by Russia to be matters of strategic and national security. From this perspective, we can understand Moscow’s position vis-a-vis Damascus’. After all, Syria’s strategic position which can potentially control oil and gas exports from the region to Europe, explains the steadfastness of Russia in its defense of President Bashar al Assad and the unity of Syria and bolstering their own military presence in Syria. From this same perspective, it can easily be concluded that the Kremlin’s resolve to expand its influence on the area must include Lebanon as well in order to complement Russia’s energy management strategy in between the Black sea and the Mediterranean. It is only logical to assume that the Russians who were successful in fighting side by side in the same trench with Iran, Hezbollah and Syria, now feel that the security of Lebanon has become a part of the security of Syria and inadvertently part of their own. In light of the diminishing Saudi influence in Lebanon, the Russians can expand their own influence there based on those fundamentals, it seems highly likely that Russia is planning to be the sole partner of Lebanon with its energy resources, especially since a large number of Russian oil companies have expressed interest in putting in tenders for gas and oil exploration in offshore Lebanese areas.”

If the above analysis of the new development is accurate, it can possibly mean one thing and one thing only that is, apart from the obvious. It can only mean that Russian diplomacy is working hard on averting any military conflict in the Levant between Arabs and their regional nemesis Israel.

Economic targets aside, as mentioned above, Russia has many international scores to settle with America; and perhaps none is worse than the humiliation that the Kissinger shuttle diplomacy has brought upon the USSR and which eventually turned the so-called peace process between Arabs and Israel into a charade in which America alone dictates the rule of the game without any role at all left for the USSR to play.

The rules of this game were set to change on the 28th of September 2015, when Russian bombers conducted their first raid on ISIS targets within Syria. That said, as Russia re-entered the role of a major global power, not to say a super power, it became incumbent on Russian leadership to play the role of international mediator and arbitrator.

America does not give a damn if Israel and Hezbollah have a new war, but Russia does; especially if Russia is well and truly intent on becoming the new peace maker, all the while protecting her strategic and economic interests.

In brief, Russia does not seem to want to shield Syria only, but also Lebanon, and inadvertently of course Israel. A new round of military conflict between Hezbollah and Israel will be devastating not only to Lebanon, but also to Israel. But more than just the material carnage and loss of life that such escalation will result in, it will have a devastating effect on any potential new peace initiative; and for Russia to assume a leading role in this process, she is under pressure to make pre-emptive measures in order to avoid such an eventuality.

The way it is, without any external deterrence and go-betweens, the next war between Hezbollah and Israel is only a question of time. The July 2006 war has destroyed most of Lebanon’s infrastructure, killed hundreds, but at the same time, Hezbollah rockets sent waves of terror across Israel.

Since then, Israel has made many pre-emptive measures. The ammonia tank in Haifa has been drained and the Israeli fertilizer manufacturing giant ICL moved its operations to China. Furthermore, Israel has worked hard on bolstering its rocket defense capability, but not to the extent that will give it an effective deterrence. This is why Israel keeps reiterating that the next escalation will see a total destruction of Lebanon in the hope that this threat in itself will be the necessary deterrence. Hezbollah on the other hand has since gained much ground battle experience in Syria, attained a huge arsenal of surface-to-surface rockets that can reach any corner of Israel, and last but not least, developed smart-bomb capable drones that have been seen in action in Syria and the Lebanese North East against ISIS.

FEBRUARY 14, 2018 · 2:00 AM

↓ Jump to Comments

Russia’s new pre-emptive move in Lebanon

By GHASSAN KADI*

Piece from an Israeli missile that landed in the eastern Lebanese town of Rayak near the border with Syria on February 10, 2018

The initial Russian-led attack on ISIS in Syria was highly successful until a glitch was added to the picture when Turkey downed a Russian Su-24 a few weeks later in November 2015.

That said, Erdogan’s apology to Putin is an acknowledgment of the former of his position in the pecking order.

Even as Turkish troops are currently conducting a major offensive on Syrian Kurds on Syrian soil, Russia has managed to stave off direct confrontation between Syria and Turkey.

So not only is Russia coming back into the Middle East with strength and determination, but also the USA is creating a huge void to be filled.

But for Russia to be the new and good “Big Brother”, she will have to find a way to curtail Israel, just like she did with Turkey.

Recent developments have been pointing to conflict between Lebanon and Israel, a conflict that can turn into a war that has thus far been avoided since July 2006.

That conflict was somehow inevitable, and it didn’t really surface until Lieberman, Israel’s Defense Minister, made provocative statements about alleged territorial rights of East Mediterranean offshore oil-gas resources.<https://www.reuters.com/article/us-natgas-lebanon-israel/israel-lebanon-clash-over-offshore-energy-raising-tensions-idUSKBN1FK1J0>

The outspoken and rather radical minister is often an embarrassment even to the staunchest supporters of right wing politics in Israel itself.

It is not surprising therefore that Hezbollah responded to Lieberman’s claims and threats by counter threats saying that should any offshore Lebanese infrastructure by targeted by Israel, Lebanon (i.e., Hezbollah) will retaliate by targeting Israeli offshore infrastructure. <http://www.almanar.com.lb/3332228>

We have all heard this tit-for-tat jargon many times before, but the new development here is that apparently the Russian Government has approached the Lebanese Government for military and security cooperation. According to Naharnet, a reliable Lebanese source, the two countries are not far from signing a formal agreement:

http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/241895

According to an article written by Salam Al-Obeidi and published on Al-Mayadeen, the proposed joint collaboration goes further. Al-Mayadeen is normally a reliable source, but what it published a few hours ago has not been corroborated elsewhere. According to Obeidi, the Russian Government is seeking an unprecedented level of military cooperation with Lebanon. (http://www.almayadeen.net/news/politics/857565/لماذا-الآن–لبنان-يفتح-مطاراته-وموانئه-أمام-الطائرات-القتالي/).

This is the English translation:

So what is behind the current Russian decision? Russia has taught us in the last decade or so that all that pertains to matters of energy resources, especially in the area between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea is considered by Russia to be matters of strategic and national security. From this perspective, we can understand Moscow’s position vis-a-vis Damascus’. After all, Syria’s strategic position which can potentially control oil and gas exports from the region to Europe, explains the steadfastness of Russia in its defence of President Bashar al Assad and the unity of Syria and bolstering their own military presence in Syria. From this same perspective, it can easily be concluded that the Kremlin’s resolve to expand its influence on the area must include Lebanon as well in order to complement Russia’s energy management strategy in between the Black sea and the Mediterranean. It is only logical to assume that the Russians who were successful in fighting side by side in the same trench with Iran, Hezbollah and Syria, now feel that the security of Lebanon has become a part of the security of Syria and inadvertently part of their own.

In light of the diminishing Saudi influence in Lebanon, the Russians can expand their own influence there based on those fundamentals, it seems highly likely that Russia is planning to be the sole partner of Lebanon with its energy resources, especially since a large number of Russian oil companies have expressed interest in putting in tenders for gas and oil exploration in offshore Lebanese areas.”

The US official Geological Survey estimates that from Gaza’s coast to southern Turkey the eastern Mediterranean holds 122 trillion cubic feet of gas, comparable to the reserves of Iraq.

Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah in an interview with Al-Mayadeen TV Network on Jan. 18, 2015. He asserted that the Resistance in Lebanon is ready to achieve the greatest victory in case of a new Israeli aggression in Lebanon.

Will the proposed Russian-Lebanese treaty make Lebanon a redline for Israel? Will it prevent any future possible escalation between Israel and Hezbollah? Will Russia be able to control Israel and replace America as the new peace negotiator who has good relationships with all parties concerned?

*Ghassan Kadi, a native of Beirut, is an analyst of Middle East affairs and the author of An Epic of Integrity: The Chronicles of the War on Syria (June 2016). Visit Intibah and Ghassan Kadi’s website.