PUTIN’S ULTIMATE TEST: Ghassan Kadi 21 February 2014

PUTIN’S ULTIMATE TEST:

Ghassan Kadi
21 February 2014


The world has already shifted from the single polarity of the post-USSR era of the so-called “New World Order” into a multipolar world in which the traditional stakeholders of the global wealth (ie Western nations) are falling heavily under debt. Needless to say their currencies, the US Dollar and the Euro are under severe threat. This Western predicament is further enhanced by the economic rise of the BRICS nations.

But this is not all. Militarily-speaking, the rise of China has been crowned recently by building its own aircraft carrier. There is little doubt that several more will be built. Chinese naval vessels are gallivanting around the China Sea posing real concerns for Japan, America’s regional ally and protectorate. The Chinese are little intimidated by the US-Japanese defence treaties and are simply doing what they believe is going to serve China’s interest, and in a manner as if the USA does not exist at all.

 India’s rise to military superpowerhood is not to be overlooked either. Apart from its nuclear capabilities, the Indian fleet is a force to be reckoned with.

 But of course history repeats itself, and more so frequently in this time and age. America’s biggest military rival will remain to be Russia, at least for a while yet being the nuclear power that it is and possessing superior military technology.

 Putin’s Russia has already dug the first stake into the heart of the New World Order five years ago, in Georgia to be exact. Later on, even though Russia did not veto the UNSC no fly resolution in Libya, Russia made a loud and clear message to the Americans that Syria is a red line that Russia will not allow them to cross. As a result, America suffered a huge humiliation and its dreams of bombarding Damascus into smithereens were put to rest when in last September Russia shot down a US missile heading towards Damascus and diverted another one by hacking into its system.

 Some observers deny this incident, but no observer with any level of vision can deny the sudden backdown of America not only from attacking Syria, but also how it went into negotiations with the Iranians.

 Any political observer who does not see and recognise those momentous events is either in deliberate denial or suffers from lack of clear vision. But to take this hysteria to the extent of promoting that there is a joint American-Russian-Iranian conspiracy against Syria is vexatious, stupid and even possibly malicious.

The West is so bemused by the Russian rise that it tried to mobilize all it can to use the Sochi Games as a political football by capitalizing on the gay rights issue. Apart from the anti-Russian antics by Western gay activists, the American NGO known as “Russia Freedom Fund” is an organization that receives tax-deductable donations. When tax deductions are granted, this stipulates government subsidies. Now why would the American government give this organization a tax deduction status if it does not see this as part of its media war campaign against Russia?

But this is not all again. The West is taking confrontation with Russia to territories that Putin is going to be very unhappy with; Ukraine.

 The events of Ukraine mimic and mirror what happened in Daraa, Syria three years ago almost to every detail. Snipers are aiming at demonstrators and police personnel. Money is being paid for people to demonstrate. Dissent groups are being financed by the West.

 Even Pussy Riot fit into the anti-Russian evil Western web.

The events in Ukraine are not any less serious than the Russian incursion at the Bay of Pigs in 1961. That event happened at America’s door steps, and now the Americans are hotting up the Cold War by taking this challenge to Russia’s door step.


The question is whether or not there is enough patriotism and clear vision among the Ukrainians like there is among the majority of Syrians who stood by their army and president.

The events of Ukraine can prove to be Putin’s ultimate test. The way out of it needs extreme skill, strength and determination. Thus far, Putin has come out from each skirmish unscathed and smiling. For the sake of world peace and order, one should hope that he comes out as a victor.

 

"BEFORE" OR "AFTER" By Ghassan Kadi 18 February 2014

“BEFORE” OR “AFTER”


Ghassan Kadi
18 February 2014

Less than 24 hours after September 11, I called a friend of mine who lived in Manhattan. At that time, no one had yet been allowed anywhere near Ground Zero and the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq had not yet happened and not even September 11was called September 11. Yet, the event was clearly a huge one, and during the conversation, with clarity, I remember saying to my friend that this day will be marked in history as a turning point and that in the future, we will be referring to events in terms of being “before or after”.

Today, we often hear and use the term “before September 11” and “after September 11” without stopping twice to think that it was only a few minutes that changed the world.

Today also, we are witnessing another history-changing event. It is not one of such short duration, but its outcome, either way, is going to have an effect that will change history.

Ironically, we do not refer to the Levant today as “the Levant of after Sykes-Picot”; but in reality it is. Little has changed since the winners of WWI (ie British and French) divided the spoils of the war and partitioned the Levant. Even an event as big as the inception of Israel did not in effect change that formula and/or the borders of the newly created states of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Iraq.

But this post Sykes-Picot formula is likely to change. It will change once we start talking about “before” or  “after the war against Syria”. Historically, Syria has been under attack by many nations over the centuries, but apart from the Crusaders, there has never been a time during which Syria/the Levant has been under such a Biblical onslaught. This is utterly unprecedented.

As the struggle is becoming more and more transparent for those who were refusing to see it in the beginning, the most obvious facet of this war is that it is a war between fundamentalist Islamism and secular nationalism. Divides of this nature are often least spoken about in most nations. They get ignored and shoved away in fear of creating tension and divisions. Even in the United States itself, the schism between the ultra-Right religious fundamentalists and the liberal sector of the community is not one that anyone wants to bring out to the open. The divide will continue and fester, and it may never have a total blowout.

In Syria however, the gloves are off and it is already an all-out war. Reportedly over 140 thousand people have already been killed and more to come. A vicious war of this extent cannot and will not end with half measures and resolutions that are meant to be politically-correct.

This is a war that will have clear edge decisive endings. There will be outright winners and outright losers.

If the fundamentalists win, they will not stop at Syria. They will be unstoppable; they will want to overtake Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. One of their organizations already calls itself ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). They have already declared what is their agenda is and what they will do to the current Sykes-Picot borders.

 

 

Fundamentalist Islamic movements have been on the move for a few decades now. Their ultimate objective is to turn the whole world to Sharia law. If they capture Syria, the rest of the Levant will fall like chess tokens, and the rest of the Islamic World will eventually follow suit.

Their win in the Levant will fuel similar actions in the whole Islamic World all the way from Morocco to Indonesia, those states which will be under threat of being overtaken by revolutions seeking the establishment of Sharia law.

 

 

This is a critical time for Islamic fundamentalism; it will either gain momentum after the war against Syria or it will be stifled.

On the other hand, the liberal voices in the Levant have been feeling the threats of the Islamists for decades, and for all those decades they played the diplomatic game that American liberals are now playing with the TEA party. But should the Syrian liberals win, they will want to make sure that they have obliterated fundamentalism from its core. There will be no half measures, no diplomacy, and no holy shrines for the Islamists to hide within.

Syria will not be able to live in peace if it kicks them out of its own borders only. They will have to be chased up in Lebanon. Syrian troops will have to enter Lebanon invited or otherwise kissing the Sykes-Picot accord goodbye. With the aid of Hezbollah and Lebanese liberals, the Islamists will have to be crushed in Lebanon. The same will apply to Jordan and Iraq. The Islamists will have no place to hide in except Saudi Arabia, and the tide will change against their favour in the rest of the Islamic World.

 

If this leads to an all-out war between Syria and Saudi Arabia, then Syria will have no option but to keep chasing them up even if it had to crush them in their final resort, the Shrine of Mecca.

No one can foresee the future, and the above scenario may remain totally hypothetical. That said, there is little doubt that the outcome of the war will be decisive and that we will be talking about the course of history in terms of “before” or “after the war against Syria”.

BANDAR'S LAST STAND By Ghassan Kadi 24 December 2013

BANDAR’S LAST STAND

By Ghassan Kadi
24 December 2013

Indications are that the USA is intent about fighting real fundamentalist terrorism at its grass root levels. After two failed wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, America was fooled By Saudi Arabia to believe that it can use those same terrorist elements to topple the government in Syria, and thus giving Hezbollah and Iran a very painful blow from which they cannot recover. The USA was led to believe that it can easily later on turn around to cull out the Islamists in Syria.

The plot did not work. Assad remains standing and the terrorists are becoming more powerful and more radicalized and out of control.

Under pressure from Russia and the turn of events, the USA had to make a U-turn realizing that Iran can play a big role in stabilizing the region, rather than destabilizing it. This angered both the Israelis and the Saudis. The Americans will have an uphill battle with their Israeli friends no doubt. They may even finally come to the understanding that supporting Israel is creating enemies and insecurity for America. But the question herein is what will they do with their Saudi friends?

America’s relationship with Saudi Arabia is based, or should we say was based on two foundations; the former’s need for oil, and the common political enemy; ie the Iran/Syria/Hezbollah triangle.

This is at best a loveless marriage of convenience that has perhaps run its course. Even with all of its hypocrisies and double standards, America must find in its friendship with Saudi Arabia a major embarrassment. Among other things, this is the state where democracy is all but non -existent, a state that does not allow women basic rights including driving, and a state that does not allow churches to be built on its sand.

More importantly, this is the state that fosters, trains and finances Islamic terrorism. This has become more prominent after the fall of Bin Laden, a foe of the Saudi royal family, and Bandar Bin Sultan appointing himself as a Al-Qaeda surrogate financier. In doing so, Bandar was not only thus far able to use the group to fight for his agenda in Syria, but he managed to stifle their terrorism within Saudi Arabia itself and which threatened and crippled the kingdom with a series of explosions and attacks that spanned for nearly quite a few years that followed Operation Desert Storm on Iraq in 1991.

As the political alliance between the USA and Saudi Arabia is waning and coming to an abrupt and unsavoury end, the future of the economic alliance does not seem much rosier, at least not on the long run.

On one hand, the Saudis are tight-lipped about the amount of their oil reserves. The Americans have always expressed great dis-ease about this. On the other hand, the huge shale oil American deposits are tipped to eventually render America needless of importing Saudi oil and may in fact enable it to become a net exporter.

As far as the Saudi/American relationship is concerned, it is not exactly the time for the Saudis to play hard ball.

Saudi Arabia now seems to be isolated in its stand on Syria. The master mind of Saudi foreign politics, Bandar Bin Sultan dreamt of toppling the Assad government and to have it replaced by a fundamentalist Islamic regime and thereby isolating Iran and weakening Hezbollah. His dreams did not come to fruition and instead ended with America easing off sanctions against Iran and seemingly resolute on reaching a deal with Iran to stamp out fundamentalists.

Domestically, Bandar’s gamble with the USA and playing the game of the big boys is highly likely to shatter his dream to become the first grandson of the founding king Abdul-Aziz to assume the throne. All Saudi monarchs have thus far been the direct children of the founding father, but they are all getting very old and the squabble over the lineage cannot be age-based any longer. Bandar wanted to achieve victory over Iran in Syria and become the unrivaled successor of the throne.

All of this has vanished and the Saudi royal family will soon have to find itself having to choose between Bandar and perhaps the very survival of the royal family and the kingdom’s status quo.

More than two years into the war in Syria, after many temptations given to Russia and two humiliating visits to Putin, a series of false flags attacks in Syria which neither resulted in any UNSC resolutions let alone a unilateral American intervention, anguish is growing within Saudi Arabia resulting from his gambles, Bandar now realizes that he has painted himself into a corner.

Turkey has almost totally abandoned him, and Jordan is growing more concerned about its own interests in this fast-changing world. Qatar wiped its hands clean and gave him the captaincy of the Titanic. Israel cannot support him more overtly than it already does.

The only supporters he has left are the Islamist fighters in Syria and his cohorts in Lebanon (the so-called March 14th Coalition). The formers are losing ground under the Syrian Army on daily basis despite some setbacks. The latters do not stand a chance against the might of Hezbollah should they opt to rekindle the fire of civil war in Lebanon.

It must be said that the March 14th Coalition has been beating up the drums of civil war for a long time. They are bracing for orders from Bandar to light up the fire.

After all of his abysmal failures, what new tricks will Bandar try to, or effectively can pull out of his sleeve? To answer this question one has to be able to answer how far will a filthy rich psychopath go? His hinchmen in Syria are already at war. Will he give the go ahead to their Lebanese counter-part? The recent developments in Lebanon make this scenario look likely, but what achievements will Bandar receive as a result? Those groups cannot be put in the ally basket. Mercenaries would be a better description.

Bandar is highly unlikely to sit quietly in a corner and behave himself. But if he keeps causing more havoc, the next question may not be what will he do, but rather how will he be dealt with? If it comes to this, his peers and who is left of his allies may see him as a liability. In war games, assets deemed as liabilities get tagged as being disposable. The avenues of disposal are countless.

Bandar has already taken his last stand when the USA was forced to abort its attack on Syria.

(Sharmine Narwani wrote a very elaborate and balanced article about the seismic shift that is happening currently in the Middle East. The article is a highly recommended read. link below).

http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/sandbox/security-arc-forms-amidst-mideast-terror-0



Originally published here:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=576912935718191&set=a.108568162552673.13501.100001984705808&type=3

CLAP IN QUSAYR, AND TRIPOLI ECHOES. By Ghassan Kadi 26 May 2013

CLAP IN QUSAYR, AND TRIPOLI ECHOES.
By Ghassan Kadi
26 May 2013

Any major political event that happens in Syria reverberates in Lebanon, and vice versa. And to understand how a Syrian Army win in Qusayr can echo in Tripoli Lebanon, we have to go back to the drawing board of Lebanese politics.

Ever since the Republic of Lebanon has been an independent entity, politics in Lebanon has been a combination of democracy and feudal hierarchy. Not only the Lebanese Parliament is based on sectarian representation, with quotas that are meant to give fair per-capita representation of different religions and sects, but the leaders themselves are in reality feudal leaders who pass on their leadership to the eldest son.

Sectarian and feudal as it was, it was kept “functioning” as the feudal lords had some role to play in attracting votes. Those feudal lords had to compete with their local competitors with the aim of attracting votes to put them in the Parliament.

No less competitive was the competition between Sunni leaders, both within their own electorates and regions, and also nationwide.

The position of Prime Minister (PM) in Lebanon is exclusive to Sunnis (according to the Lebanese Constitution). Ever since independence, this position has been the outcome of a game of musical chairs played in between the prominent Sunni families of Solh (of Beirut), Karami (of Tripoli), Salam (of Beirut) and few other minor ones.

The change from one PM to another did not mean much, but the same could be said even about Western democracies. Recent events have shown that not even Obama was able to implement real change. However, the change in the leadership and the person of the PM in Lebanon did a lot of good and as times it meant that certain reforms and/or changes had to be implemented, and the competitiveness between the legacy leaders kept the population buzzing with news of failures and scandals, and it was difficult for any politician to find a façade to hide behind.

Moreover, apart from swinging voters (who would have to be minorities in Lebanon), political loyalties were often based on personal acquaintances with the actual leaders. Those leaders had to have “open salons” for their constituencies where they often offered sweets and refreshments and people went there asking for special favours; such as fixing the village roads and even personal ones such as finding jobs for their children. Those loyalties were very personal and very strong, and quite often, the hardcore loyalists were prepared to put their lives on the line in protection of their leaders.
Then suddenly, this delicate, archaic, but somehow functional system was hit with a political atom bomb; the Hariri bomb.

Rafik Hariri was a self-made billionaire. He was an entrepreneur who was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth. When he wanted to get into the political scene in Lebanon, he did not have a legacy to capitalize on, he had to create one. He spent hundreds of millions of dollars on national projects including rebuilding Beirut’s CBD which was ravaged during the Civil War. His Hariri Foundation sponsored the tertiary education of thousands of students. He did do a lot of good things which no traditional politician has ever done. But at the same time, he rose to political power by bringing into Lebanon the American style of campaigning with an open and overt corruption that his son Saad was later on better able to be shameless about.

At leadership level, Saad Hariri has literally bought the Sunni leadership legacy with the power of money. The Karami legacy in Tripoli under the leadership of the patriarch Omar Karami did not kowtow to him, but Hariri managed to create a split in this family and found splinter groups who are now pro-Hariri Karami’s. The other Beiruty and/or Sunni legacies had to either tow the Hariri line or simply vanish.

Even prominent and highly respectable Sunni politicians (such as ex: PM Salim Al-Hus) have lost their seats, and Hus had to lose his seat to a virtually unknown bimbo named Ghonwa Jalloul to the outrage of many Lebanese.

One of his Akkar MP’s (Muin Merhibi) has recently lost his cool and brandished his AK47 and emptied its magazine in the air in defiance of a Lebanese Police check point.

At the hierarchal political level, Hariri makes it clear to his puppet MP’s and regional leaders that he wants numbers and not necessarily brains within his ranks. All they have to do is to follow his orders, unquestioned.
Other self-made leaders in Lebanon have gained support and loyalists in the past by having charisma and their ability to round up people with agendas of reform, promises of freedom from feudalism, etc…. but Hariri cannot even speak. His only asset is his deep wallet.

At street level, Hariri has literally bought votes for cash, and even sent free return tickets to Lebanese ex:pats who live in places as far as the USA and Australia to go and vote for his candidates nationwide. The loyalty of this new age of loyalists is not based on personal relationships that connect the leader with the community. They are only on money. That said, there is a new form of loyalists, those who have an Islamist fundamentalist agenda, and they are using Hariri’s money to have free access to arms so they can go and fight their Jihad wars in Syria and prepare for their Jihad war against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Hariri has also bought a huge percentage of the religious Sunni leadership and when, for example, Malek Shaar, the Mufti of Tripoli opens up his mouth to speak, he would only be regurgitating the words and emotions of Hariri.

More can be said about this dangerous Mafiosi, Saad Hariri. But in relation to the recent developments in Tripoli, he is the only reason behind the perpetuation of the fighting. The blood is on his hands. This is the only place where he is able to vent his hatred on Shiites, and the only reason this is possible is because Jabal Mohsen is a tiny area that is totally surrounded from all angles by his thugs. And in the wake of the advances of the Syrian Army in Qusayr, he sent his thugs to retaliate in the hope of taking over the Alawi region of Jabal Mohsen. They failed and failed abysmally.

In doing this, he is truly playing with fire in the most dangerous manner possible. If this Tripoli conflict is not resolved, and if the Jabal Mohsen community capitulates, Hariri thugs will march in and kill every man woman and child.

If the Jabal Mohsen militia reach the enough-is-enough point and start attacking rather than defending (as their leader Rafaat Ali has said recently), then the fire will be highly like to spread to engulf all of Lebanon.

Among other hate-mongers, in Saida South Lebanon Hariri has his puppet Sunni Imam, Ahmed Al-Asir who has been making it very clear that he wants to fight Hezbollah and kill Shia. This half-wit is waiting for half a signal from his ulterior master Saad Hariri to send the South into a blood bath.
Ironically and sadly, Hezbollah does not only need to focus on averting Israeli danger, but also to deal with those sectarian war mongers and blood thirsty Jihadists.

What is more ironic, is that Hariri and his Jihadist policies are all happening with the blessings of the West, the same West that is mourning the innocent slain British soldier.

Originally published here: Screen shots provided to prove this is Ghassan Kadi's work. It was stolen and republished elsewhere (see below these screen shots for details)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/283089981710448/permalink/599521460067297/

This work of Ghassan Kadi's was taken and presented on "Arabi Souri's" website as his own. He did not seek Ghassan's permission and put himself as the author. In the comments section a USA-Israeli dual national who co-writes Syrianews.cc with "Arabi Souri" heaped praised on the article. What other writings of Kadi over all these years has been plagiarised word for word and presented  as "Arabi Souri's" own?

http://www.syrianews.cc/clap-qusayr-tripoli-echoes/
Screen shots from Arabi Souri's website of the work he passed off as his own.

And the USA-Israeli who helps write Syrianews.cc praised the article which was presented as the work of her colleague "Arabi Souri" but is in fact the work of Ghassan Kadi.
"Arabi Souri" who actually lives in Dubai now uses this profile.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100018002822192

A DEBATE WITH FSA SUPPORTERS February 2013

A Debate on Vonvo 26 February 2013 (mainly with Mary Rizzo)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/283089981710448/permalink/560120787340698/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAIJObseuuw
Discussions on Facebook in The Syrian Revolution The Untold Story. Some profiles are deactivated so are not captured on the screen shots.

THE RUSSIAN LION Translated/Interpreted by Ghassan Kadi & Intibah Wakeup

The Russian Lion
By Sami Koleib, Al Manar
12, December 2013

The use of the term “Russian Bear” has become commonplace. This is a term that came from the West, perhaps from Britain.  That term was meant to distort the image of Russia as a state that is associated with harshness and viciousness.  Reciprocally, a rosy picture is used to describe the United States as the “American Dream”.  The extent of this comparison, especially during the Cold War, did not seem to bemuse the Russians much.  The Russians themselves adopted the idea to the extent that they used the bear as their international mascot in sporting and celebratory arenas. This included the image of a Russian bear playing the balalaika, an image the Russians and the rest of the world loved.

Ever since the former polished-faced ex KGB Vladimir Putin took over the reins in his country, a new image emerged. Today he is referred to as the Master of the Kremlin, transformed into a “lion within the jungle of the international community”, one who grabs opportunities and gets them. The image of the President who is an athlete, a musician, a businessman, an ever-youthful and energetic person, a judo and taekwondo wrestler, despite him being 62 years old, he has become one who was capable of upsetting the easy slumber of the White House and NATO.

There is hardly any exaggeration in this description. Putin has been able to dictate his terms upon the "international jungle", as the term “international community” would be too kind a description. He has forced NATO to review its defence shield policy.  He threatened a return to the arms race.  He averted most UNSC resolutions that he did not agree with. Together with China and other BRICS nations, he decided to change the path of the mono-polarity of the world.  He alluded to establishing a new international monetary fund which would exchange the USD for a new currency. He used a speech he gave in 2008 in which he vehemently said that America needs to treat Russia as an international partner and that the time of mono-polarity has ended and that the rest of the world does not follow Washington’s agendas.

In this "international jungle", Putin made his way to the Middle East resolutely via two avenues; Syria and Iran.  He is also capable of getting in via the Israeli gate as Russia has more than a million Israelis of Russian origin.  During the peak of the Syrian crisis, he visited Tel Aviv and offered his services as the only party that is able to play the role of mediator between Israel and the countries with which Israel finds it the most difficult to deal with.

Putin realised that the resilience of the Syrian government in face of those who wish to topple President Bashar Al Assad would give Russia more credibility. He never said he was defending Assad, but rather defending international law.  This is an important stand for him and the image of his country.  He can say that he defended a State and enabled it to remain standing.  This gives more credibility to the Russian role. Others defended the other side and found themselves having to" go back to the Russian argument that iterates that military intervention and toppling a government by force would fail and that the departure of Assad, prior to Geneva II, is not acceptable and that priority needs to be given to fighting terrorism.  Together with China, he formed an international diplomatic shield to protect the Syrian government and followed that with military hardware, experts and perhaps more.

Certain Western and Arabic States tried to distort the image of Putin. Some of them claimed that he is supporting a dictatorial regime and contributing to Syrian bloodshed.  Saudi Arabia said, at some stage, that Russia will lose its interests in the region. Putin did not move by one inch. It became imperative for the Saudi chief of intelligence, Bandar, at the end, to go and visit Moscow (to try to negotiate).

Putin takes another step in expanding his sphere of influence. He sends his foreign minister Sergei Lavrov to Tehran to establish a broad based partnership.  The stern Lavrov, just like his President, says that Russia is determined to broaden and improve its relationships with Iraq in an attempt to contribute towards stability of that country. Putin affirmed that Iran is a main player in Geneva II.

A few kilometres away the GCC Summit is held.  There is a huge concern.  For the first time cracks appear that threaten its unity.  The Sultanate of Oman, which is close to Iran and Syria, takes a stand that is tantamount to mutiny against the bigger states. The Emirates exile some opponents under the justification of preventing them from political activities.  Kuwait sends to Damascus indications of openness despite the concerns of its conservative hawks.  All States, except Qatar, declare an open or covert war to curb the Muslim Brotherhood.

What is new in the GCC Summit is condoning the Iranian-Western resolution. This is quite pertinent given that it comes only a few weeks after Saudi Arabia declines to comment on the matter.  What is also new here is the unanimous condoning of the participation of the Syrian National Coalition in Geneva II. This is more important as this new deal stipulates that Assad remains in power and also comes after the Syrian Army and its allies are just about to finish taking control of Damascus province after the battle of Qalamoun. Everything else is well known.  To expect more out of this resolution would be like waiting to hear of another Israeli settler killing a Palestinian in Jerusalem before the GCC decides that Jerusalem should be the capital of Palestine.

Putin agrees with America that Iran should not have nuclear weapons and that Israel should remain strong.  They both concur on the priority of fighting terrorism which makes it imperative that Arab armies remain strong including the Syrian Army. This can diminish the westward Islamic expansion.  These are the points of agreement between America and Russia, but their competition is stronger.

Westerners feel the danger of Russian expansion, this is why the West considers it ok to use Ukraine as a gateway (to hit at Russia).  Europe feels driven to support the opposition.  The American Assistant Secretary of State meets with the Ukrainian opposition.  France tries to sabotage the Western-Iranian nuclear deal, and it continues to keep good links with Saudi Arabia after it abandoned Qatar in the hope of upgrading the status of the armed opposition against the Syrian government.  None of this seems to faze Russia.  Putin continues to go from strength to strength, imposing his own terms.

The time of American military gambles is no longer viable.  Putin realises this.  Here enters into the scene the chief of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, General Muhammad Ali Jaafari.  He ridicules the recent American-Israeli rhetoric about a military strike about Iran, saying “…any talk about military action against Iran is ridiculous”

The world changes.  Instead of adopting the traditional American way of invading countries, invasions that are very expensive and without clear, foreseeable outcomes, at a time when America has serious domestic issues, Barack Obama is more in favour of negotiating peaceful agreements.  Vladimir Putin seems more credible as he has been able to achieve a new and serious era that is based on the end of global unilateralism.  The global lion does not seem to be prepared to back off at any cost.  Russians are once again feeling elated by his enhancement of their national pride. But what will he do with Syria’s lion (Assad)? Will he continue to support him to the end? This is the determinator.  There is a conviction in Damascus that Russia would not have won its political battle if the Syrian government fell. The most recent communication between Putin and Assad has partly bolstered this understanding to say the least.

Translated/Interpreted by Ghassan Kadi and Intibah Wakeup.
Original Article:
http://www.almanar.com.lb/adetails.php?eid=675475&cid=31&fromval=1&frid=31&seccatid=171&s1=1

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.