Military Review

Damocles sword over Damascus. Strikes on Syria do not solve security problems in the Middle East

27
The situation around Syria and the possible attack on it still looks extremely alarming. There are no guarantees that President Obama will not give the order to strike, which may cause a final collapse of the situation in this agitated region.


However, there are a number of considerations that suggest that not everything is as simple as it looks on the TV screen. Obama behaves extremely uncertainly, despite the ominous rhetoric. All this looks quite unusual, especially if we recall the beginning of America’s previous wars and the aggressive pressure of propaganda in front of them. This time it's not like that. And there are reasons for this.

The processes that began in 2011 year, which were very quickly called the Arab spring, had and continue to have a powerful layer of objective internal reasons. The economic crisis that began in 2008 only aggravated them and led to an explosion. President Obama took advantage of the Arab Spring to launch his own project to reformat the Middle East, in which the Muslim Brotherhood movement played an important role. It was the US tool to establish a "new order". The meaning of the establishment of this order looks rather unobvious, however, caused by iron necessity. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan, which cost the United States more than 2 trillion. dollars, significantly undermined their power, and most importantly - forced them to "hang" in this swamp, not allowing the maneuver of his military machine. The main danger for the United States is now coming from China, and an attempt to cut it off from the resource base of the Middle East with direct actions such as the introduction of troops into key and significant countries in the region failed.

China began a powerful penetration into those countries and regions in which the United States was weakly present, and the Europeans could not offer them effective resistance.

First of all, we are talking about Africa, whose huge raw materials reserves have been the subject of close attention to the booming Chinese economy. Having entrenched in the Middle East, the United States could no longer threaten Chinese interests in other regions of the world - the same Africa, Latin America, and indeed, in the Middle East, the Chinese felt not so bad, having established a partnership with the oil industry. giant iran.

The withdrawal of the US Army from the region has become imperative. Obama won his first election precisely on the slogan of ending the war and the withdrawal of American troops.

However, no one was going to leave the region. It was about finding a new alternative to a direct American presence and creating an environment unfriendly to Chinese interests in this region. Corrupt and irremovable secular elites of the Arab countries could not become an effective substitute - and therefore Obama relied on aggressive Islamism, giving it the most favored regime in its policies.

The bet on the "Muslim Brotherhood" in this sense looked the most promising. The “Brothers” set themselves the task of building a single pan-Arab, and in the long term - a pan-Islamic state, focused on the protection of Islamic values ​​in their fundamental reading. This process had to be accompanied by the complete reformatting of the existing borders, and therefore by continuous revolutions and wars.

In this case, the region would long be plunged into the chaos of confrontation, in which the maintenance of normal economic and economic activities would be unthinkable, and weak state formations would remain under the control of the United States through a network of existing bases and several satellites - such "looking" for the region. Among them - Qatar and Israel. The climax of the defeat of the region was to be the crushing of Saudi Arabia and Iran with their subsequent territorial dismemberment.

However, Obama did not take into account the fact that any revolution always ends in counter-revolution. The Arab spring, which was going in full accordance with his plans, has been going in that direction for almost two years. Processes began to spin out of control simply due to their scale. So far, the Obama scenario has never been implemented anywhere, so there was no proven methodology and process technology. Islamists, who previously could be controlled through supplies weapons and financing, now gained strength and power, especially after the crushing of the Gaddafi regime. Now they no longer need custody, and absolutely uncontrolled Salafi radicals have come to the fore instead of the relatively moderate, although quite aggressive, Muslim Brotherhood.

Al-Qaida, which was a tool in the former policy of the United States, turned from an object of politics into its subject - and the US plans gradually began to undergo erosion, the further, the more. The key point in the collapse of Obama’s policy was the assassination of the US ambassador to Benghazi. At this point, apparently, Obama decided to replace the entire strategy.

The US goal remained the same - exit and refusal from direct participation in the affairs of the region. However, it took to change the tool - to a more predictable, even less manageable. Iran should have become such an instrument.

Iran is the regional adversary of a key US ally in the Saudi Arabia region. And the Saudis very quickly came to the conclusion that the cautious attempts that had begun for reconciliation and rapprochement between the United States and Iran threatened them with an early collapse and loss of statehood. Moreover, the United States did not hide the fact that Saudi Arabia, in all their plans, had to eventually split into several historical areas.

For the kingdom, the question of survival has become the key, and the war in Syria has become an instrument of this survival. The collapse of the Assad regime meant a significant weakening of Iran’s position in the region, a rupture of the “Shiite” belt from the Lebanese Hezbollah, a moderately secular, but nonetheless Alawite Assad regime, the solid Shiite government of Iraq and a clerical-fundamental Iran.

The cruelty of the war in Syria is connected with this, although several key factors have certainly intertwined in it at once - geo-economic interests, geopolitical, and to a certain extent geo-cultural ones.

The United States in the war in Syria pursued several goals, one of which was the massive extermination of the Salafis hostile to its plans. Assad, fighting for the survival of the country, carried out this plan by the United States on an industrial scale. The colossal losses of militants who are unable to resist militarily against the Syrian army, which, moreover, gained experience during the war, fully responded to Obama’s plans. The intensity of the conflict was regulated by quite trivial methods of regulating the supply of arms and the financing of the militants. Of course, the processes were very large-scale, and not without failures, but in general, the task was carried out.

The US’s task in this war was also the depletion of Saudi Arabia. Not so much the depletion of its financial resources as human resources — for the survival of the kingdom, the huge masses of Salafi militants were a resource that provided militarily far from powerful militant Saudi Arabia with Iranian immunity.

The culmination of the war in Syria was to be a peace conference, which would recognize the continued existence of Syria Assad as an independent, but weakened and exhausted by the war state, after which the United States could share the region with its new leader - the winner in the Syrian war Iran. Following this war, Iran became an unquestionable contender for the main role in the entire Middle, and possibly the Middle East. After this, he had to finish off the losers, and first of all Saudi Arabia, which again had to lead to the desired result for the US - the emergence of a powerful local conflict, but at the interstate level. What made it difficult for China to master the resources of the region, but at the same time released the US military power to reorient it to the region of Southeast Asia, to China’s vulnerable underbelly.

A provocation in Eastern Gut using chemical weapons turned out to be completely unexpected for Obama and took him by surprise. This became apparent after a week of silence and a completely indistinct speech in which he seemed to be in favor of punishing the guilty, but did not dare to take responsibility for himself and passed the decision on the beginning of the war to Congress.

From this it follows that Obama categorically does not want to fight in Syria. Just because then about any rapprochement with Iran there can be no talk. And all subsequent plans again fly to hell. The pause, taken before 9 September, will obviously be used to try to conceal undercover struggle to convince congressmen to ban military actions for Obama. Obama will pursue the same goal at the G20 meeting, where he will give to persuade himself the leaders of world leaders to resolve the issue peacefully and diplomatically.

Nevertheless, the probability of hitting Syria is very high. Obama cannot afford to appear weak - they do not negotiate with the weak, and Iran is very sensitive about the situation.

Obama is required to show remarkable skill and walk along the thin line that separates him from irreparable decisions. Not the fact that it can - and then a military conflict is inevitable. In this case, his plans are destined to undergo a third rethinking, and it is not necessary that he succeeds.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Denis
    Denis 9 September 2013 08: 14 New
    +5
    US tool to establish a “new order"
    This is more accurate, but they started talking about security. Where could the mattresses install it?
    Let them keep that the citizens of Syria are taken care of
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 9 September 2013 08: 23 New
      +5
      Quote: Denis
      This is more accurate, but they started talking about security. Where could the mattresses install it?

      In Detroit laughing
    2. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 9 September 2013 08: 24 New
      +1
      Quote: Denis
      Let them keep that the citizens of Syria are taken care of

      They will find many reasons. For them, the main thing is to achieve their goal. Interestingly, the further they get carried away, the more mistakes they make. Lose their previous positions.
      1. Orel
        Orel 9 September 2013 08: 52 New
        +6
        Good article. Soon everything will become clear. There are facts that confirm the position of the author:
        1. Congressional voting will take place around the time that UN international inspectors announce the results of their investigation.
        2. Samples of UN inspectors are analyzed in Swedish laboratories. Obama was in talks in Sweden a few days ago.
        3. Obama's Indecision.
        If we imagine that the UN inspectors will declare that the chemical weapons were handicraft, everything will become clear to everyone and Congress may reject the intervention. Then Obama will save face. If the inspectors do not say anything definite, then Obama cannot avoid war. It will soon become clear what he agreed on in Sweden ...
        1. Sandov
          Sandov 9 September 2013 11: 57 New
          0
          The processes that began in 2011, which were very quickly called the Arab spring, had and continue to have a powerful layer of objective internal causes. The economic crisis that began in 2008 only exacerbated them and led to an explosion. President Obama took advantage of the Arab spring to launch his own Middle East reformatting project, in which the Muslim Brotherhood movement played an important role.

          Rather, it will be like this: the amers planned and organized these so-called revolutions to fulfill their own plans.
        2. Canep
          Canep 9 September 2013 15: 08 New
          0
          I came to the conclusion that Barak Huseynovich does not want to fight in Syria when he submitted this question to the Congress. But he needs to do something with the "red line".
        3. repytw
          repytw 9 September 2013 16: 39 New
          0
          UN inspectors promised results only in October, should once again leave for Syria.
      2. SPACE
        SPACE 9 September 2013 10: 18 New
        0
        Quote: Denis
        Where could her mattresses be installed? Let them keep that the citizens of Syria are taken care of

        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        In Detroit

        Quote: tronin.maxim
        They will find many reasons. The main thing for them is to achieve their goal.

        By establishing democracy in Syria, they are improving the economic situation in Detroit.
  2. a52333
    a52333 9 September 2013 08: 21 New
    +2
    Perhaps Anatoly is right. An article flashed today that the bombing will be three days. A three-day bombing is more like trying to "get away nicely" than focusing on results. And you can fit into the budget proposed by the Saudis.
    1. Aryan
      Aryan 9 September 2013 11: 53 New
      0
      Putin said he won’t let Syria get a drink
      NATO wants to hit the table with its private
      and get to spank bully
  3. mirag2
    mirag2 9 September 2013 08: 32 New
    +2
    Obama himself does not want war, the American military (those who are "hawks") do not want military action, and Kerry seems to be fulfilling someone's order. Saudi Arabia needs this, and Israel is beneficial that there is a war in Syria and his potential enemy is weakened and harassed.
  4. Marconi41
    Marconi41 9 September 2013 08: 38 New
    0
    You can say as much as you like that a 3-day strike will not change the political situation, BUT how to explain it to ordinary Syrian citizens who will fall on their heads Tomogavki.
  5. yorik_gagarin
    yorik_gagarin 9 September 2013 08: 42 New
    +5
    "The main danger for the US now comes from China."
    This is who is talking. In the West, nobody talks about China at all. They say Assad behind the back of Russia, Moscow delivered a chemical. weapons, Putin then Putin. Nothing about China’s policy. In Syria, I have not seen a single Chinese flag. Google about the alignment of forces in the region - China does not smell anywhere anywhere. If China is dangerous for the United States, then probably he doesn’t know anything about it, or the West is so frightened by China that they are afraid to mention it in a bitch, and Russia is carrying out the front command. China will never fight with the United States. The Chinese are not warriors. They will wait for someone to eat. And then they will build relationships with the winner. Waiting for real action from China is stupid. I said this at the very beginning of the conflict.
  6. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 9 September 2013 08: 42 New
    +1
    They will bomb.
    1. Suhov
      Suhov 9 September 2013 10: 53 New
      0
      Quote: serge-68-68
      Bomb will be.

      If only to bomb ...

      It would be very cool. Imagine:

      Allies could not wait to bomb Syria
      but after Syria them bounced
      their desire quickly ended ...
      wassat
  7. Kiliny
    Kiliny 9 September 2013 08: 59 New
    0
    Read, see http://poznavatelnoe.tv/ http://www.odnoklassniki.ru/poznavatelnoe.tv http://vk.com/poznavatelnoe_tv Join now! Don't be indifferent
  8. pensioner
    pensioner 9 September 2013 09: 06 New
    0
    Many thanks to the author! Such a small article sometimes costs hundreds of large ones.
  9. ReifA
    ReifA 9 September 2013 09: 34 New
    0
    IMHO an ambiguous article. How the Saudis want to finance their own attrition is unclear. Obama, IMHO, mumbles more because of the reaction of the world community to his plans. + "said - do it", but it is a little gutsy to do it, and I think very much regrets about the said condition. In Iran, for example, it is clear what the regime will do with nuclear weapons. It is clear that in a civil war, the use of chemical. weapons will be problematic to attribute to someone. It is clear that if the regime wins, such use is possible only from those opposing the regime. Therefore, Obama just got into a puddle. IMHO soiled Obama is the reason for gestures, so the reason is more prosaic.
    1. TRex
      TRex 9 September 2013 09: 56 New
      +1
      Yeah ... "Everything is confused in the Oblonskys' house" ... Who pays for what, who wants to absorb whom, to dismember ... Maybe I don't understand why? "The United States pursued several goals, one of which was the mass extermination of the Salafis hostile to its plans. Assad, fighting for the country's survival, carried out this US plan on an industrial scale." So who do we need? Alawites, Salafis, Shiites, Sunites?
      Someone explain - where can you see the US plans for the dismemberment of the UAE?
  10. left-wing
    left-wing 9 September 2013 09: 46 New
    0
    By the way, yes I agree with yorik_gagarin China does not even mention when they say that Syria is still only thanks to Russia.
  11. user
    user 9 September 2013 10: 03 New
    0
    "Any military action without the sanction of the UN Security Council is aggression."
    All the same, Putin managed to put a hedgehog into Obama’s pants at the G20 meetings, but in general the main problem of the USA, the lack of a politician like Roosevelt and Churchill
  12. SPACE
    SPACE 9 September 2013 10: 12 New
    +1
    There was information that the Norwegian company found large reserves of oil and gas in Syria, a good investment of depreciating capital for the United States, this time. Qatar needs a pipe for its gas, and those who need this gas have two. Third, Israel and Turkey will grow in land. These are private goals, and from the general they will close Iran, crush China, squeeze Russia, this is their contribution to the future, access to the operational space, well, they will finally put BV on a chain, everything else is just an excuse, and everything is in accordance with the West's postulate, " the best policy is economics. " In general, very big interests converged on a very small Syria and they need to achieve them by any non-critical means. Unfortunately, neither Syria nor Iran will stop them by their actions, they will only aggravate and accelerate the development of the situation. Only China and Russia can stop them, but this requires some clear agreed statements and some tough actions, the task of putting opponents in a certain situation where they will need to answer the eternal Shakespearean question "to be or not to be", but this suicidal line they go to be afraid.
  13. Suhov
    Suhov 9 September 2013 10: 30 New
    +1
    Chemical weapons are weapons of retaliation, "an atomic bomb for the poor".
    Worries thenthat if Assad is driven into a corner, he will use it.
    Otherwise, why did he need it?
    Surely he is familiar with such a concept as “Colin Powell's test tube ...”
    And also in the course - where the above "Powell test tube" can lead.
    Street Law: "He took out the barrel - shoot!»
    In this case, it sounds like this: “If you have a weapon of retaliation, use it!”
    sad
  14. Ross
    Ross 9 September 2013 11: 21 New
    0
    Quote: Orel
    Good article. Soon everything will become clear. There are facts that confirm the position of the author:
    1. Congressional voting will take place around the time that UN international inspectors announce the results of their investigation.
    2. Samples of UN inspectors are analyzed in Swedish laboratories. Obama was in talks in Sweden a few days ago.
    3. Obama's Indecision.
    If we imagine that the UN inspectors will declare that the chemical weapons were handicraft, everything will become clear to everyone and Congress may reject the intervention. Then Obama will save face. If the inspectors do not say anything definite, then Obama cannot avoid war. It will soon become clear what he agreed on in Sweden ...

    Like any US president, Obama is not independent. Any president of the United States, even before the election, is a protégé of either the Rockefellers (for example the Bushes) or the Rothschilds. Obama is a protege of the latter, hence "his" global politics. The Saudis have a strong bond with the Bush-Rockefeller. Qatar - Rothschild Protectorate.
    What did not finish El Murat. The Rothschilds lost Saudi Arabia in favor of the Rockefellers as a result of the 2 World War. Iran was their patrimony before the Islamic Revolution. This is more understandable about the hidden intentions of global players.
  15. KG_patriot_last
    KG_patriot_last 9 September 2013 12: 37 New
    0
    A blow to Syria has no reason to solve security problems. On the contrary, the elimination of all Shiite Muslims is expected to untie the hands of the Saudis, Israel and Qatar ...
  16. mitya24
    mitya24 9 September 2013 13: 40 New
    +1
    This is a good article, but it lacks a clear explanation of such an implacable position of the Kremlin as we have seen in recent days and especially on the sidelines of the summit. Following the logic of the article, the main US competitor in the region is China. Why, de facto, in the anti-war scenario, the Celestial Empire is in the wake of Russia? Why is the PLA Navy not bursting with all its might in the Mediterranean Sea, and the air defense with the "made in china" nameplate is not deployed on the Syrian coast. In general, China remains rather muddy. Everyone regards it as a great modern power, but this very great power is what China lacks or is it a feature of East Asian diplomacy ???
  17. eplewke
    eplewke 9 September 2013 13: 50 New
    0
    Well, I don’t know about the rapprochement between the USA and Iran. It sounds somehow implausible. Here is the bombing of Iran - this is more believable. And to bomb Syria in order to draw Iran into the game, but Russia is rebellious here with its tough president. America does not need Iran as an ally, they need their oil and gas, and hordes of terrorists who are ready to rush to Russia and China ...
  18. repytw
    repytw 9 September 2013 16: 49 New
    0
    With the article, not everything is so simple. China does not support Syria because it does not need it, it needs Iran, they will threaten it, then there will be Chinese flags in Tehran. If America makes bets on Iran, then it is very mistaken, since it and Israel have always been enemy No. 1 for Iran and they will not have friendship. She’s probably doing everything here to turn the entire Middle East into chaos, without exception, and then direct the flows of refugees, weapons, militants to Europe and Russia. This is proved by Afghanistan with its heroin.
  19. Sirocco
    Sirocco 9 September 2013 17: 50 New
    +1
    where he will let leaders of world leaders persuade themselves to resolve the issue peacefully and diplomatically.
    They play beautifully, hell, actors born))) Although all their efforts are an attempt to create a good face in a bad game. I wonder how the US will come out of this situation? they will give up their words, that is, the bombing, lose their face-influence in the world, begin the bombing all the same, but with a different fascist connotation. Solid Gordian knot for the states.