News about the beginning of Russia's military participation in operations against ISIS in Syria has firmly seized the lead on inforkanalah the world. Moreover, the entire day, even in Western countries, such havoc reigned in the presentation of the material that it was simply impossible to disassemble at least some official attitude of the politicians of these countries to the actions of Russia. It was only by the end of the day (in Europe), apparently coordinating the position with the State Department, that the tone of the messages more or less leveled off and became moderately negative. But in any case, the tone of numerous statements and statements of politicians and analysts expressed one main feeling - confusion.
Confusion happens by surprise. I don’t know if anyone seriously thought that Putin’s meeting with Obama could change Russia's position on the Syrian issue, but this surprise itself is even more surprising. Indeed, for a couple of months now, as Russia, without hiding at all, was preparing this operation. Remember the recent history with the prohibitions of the passage of our aircraft over Bulgaria and Greece, the cries of the State Department about this. And a multiple increase in the intensity of the work of the Syrian Express? In the blog of my comrade nosikot about this there is a whole group of great photos. That is, Russia did not hide anything, was preparing for a long time, actively and completely openly. So why suddenly such a surprise on the verge of "shock and awe"?
In the “Syrian history,” which has been lasting for four years, there are a lot of different questions, without answers to which it is extremely difficult to understand everything that is happening today, as well as the complex and ambiguous reaction in the West to these events. These are the questions that many ask themselves:
1. Why did Russia decide to directly participate in events just now, four years later? And why, or rather, why, yet decided?
2. Why is the West, in principle, opposed Assad?
3. Why did the West with the start of the war in Syria never decide on direct military participation by analogy with Libya?
4. What is ISIS, who created it and why?
5. Why is the US reaction to Russian activity so ambiguous?
6. Why are Syria’s neighbors Turkey and KSA behaving strangely?
7. What is the role of Israel in the events in Syria?
8. Where did the coordination center in Baghdad suddenly come from? And why in Baghdad?
9. How are Ukraine, Syria and Yemen connected?
Such questions may be much more. And, most interestingly, not one of them has a simple and unambiguous answer. Unfortunately, modern humanity has become accustomed to simple questions and the same simple answers to them. It is necessary to find at least one plausible explanation for an event, how a person calms down and considers it to be true until the moment when another oddity ceases to fit into the painted picture of the world. All this can be very clearly observed in Syria.
From the very beginning, the process of destabilization in Syria was perceived as an element of the “Arab spring”. Four years ago, few doubted that the events in this country would clearly develop according to the Libyan or, at worst, Egyptian scenario. But time passed, and the farther, the more what was happening in this country began to differ significantly from the “standard”. To the surprise of many, Assad behaved completely differently than Gaddafi. To even greater surprise, the Syrian army was in no hurry to decompose and scatter. And the awesomeness of the Western coalition in the fight against the “dictator” looked absolutely surprising. It is possible to attribute this indecision to the influence of Moscow and Tehran, which immediately took a fairly clear position, having provided Assad with real help by people (Iran) and weapons (Russia), but from a purely military point of view this help was hardly capable of changing anything fundamentally. Even the Russian S-300s delivered to Assad could not have drastically affected the situation if the West had used massive bombing. Moreover, the Syrian leader, for his part, was also not in a hurry to put them into business. The repeated and almost unpunished raids of the Israeli aviation on Syrian objects to confirm this.
And here arises the main question. Was it necessary for the West to win a quick and decisive victory in Syria? And the answer to this question is very twofold. A very quick and very decisive victory for the West in Syria definitely wanted and even planned. But under the guise of the triumph of the internal opposition, which has decisively displaced its dictator. That is, I wanted to, but only in the form in which it could be represented by purely intra Syrian fights. And as soon as this plan failed, the “game” immediately shifted to long sluggish maneuvers. This moment must be very well understood. It is connected with the fact that the planning of the fall of Assad proceeded simultaneously under several mutually exclusive strategic scenarios.
The first, the one that is fast and internal, had several consistent results. The fall of Assad - the coming to power in Syria of forces controlled by the West - the attack of the coalition on Iran - the creation of a single zone of tension from Syria to Afghanistan - pressure through the South on Russia. I have already painted this script in some detail before, because now I give it only in the form of a bare diagram. In parallel, this scenario envisaged the construction of oil and gas pipelines from the Middle East to Europe from KSA, Qatar and Iran, bypassing Russia, that is, creating a powerful opportunity for economic pressure on Russia (and China). Under this scenario, large-scale financing of the Syrian rebels from Qatar and KSA was attracted. From the north, for assisting in the destruction of Assad, Turkey was promised control over the regions inhabited by Syrian Kurds. And this assistance was planned in the form of direct participation of the Turkish military in ground operations.
At some point, this script failed. I am not ready to state unequivocally why exactly this happened. Has the impact on the events of Russia, whether the active assistance to Assad from Iran and Hezbollah, or ambivalence to what is happening in US ruling circles? Most likely, the last factor played a crucial role, if not decisive. If you recall, the beginning of events falls on the first term of the Obama presidency, when the State Department ruled Hillary Clinton. But the failures began after the election of Obama for a second term, when he managed to get rid of the reckless partner in tandem. And this is not a matter of personal confrontation. This is a question of the fundamental choice of the path of development of the USA from two mutually exclusive alternatives. In the scenario, carried out in the life of Clinton, Obama was prepared for the role of sacred sacrifice, which for some reason was not at all happy and tried in every way to avoid the fate prepared for him.
Here to the place to recall a number of mystical predictions that are in direct connection with the events taking place in the region in question.
There are three basic predictions:
1. The rise of Russia will begin with the fall of Syria.
2. The last president of the United States will be 44, he is a black American.
3. 3-I world war will begin with the territory of Iran.
There are other, more vague, in which the beginning of the "apocalypse" and the arrival of the Savior are associated precisely with Syria.
Any predictions are always just a more or less likely forecast of events for a certain scenario. And this scenario, which involves fundamental changes in the entire modern world order, is primarily dangerous for the current authorities of all countries involved in the scenario. Even for Russia, whose predictions promise the return of greatness, its realization is extremely dangerous, associated with colossal casualties and losses. And even more so this scenario is not attractive for Iran and the United States. Is it any wonder that there is a constant search for alternatives that can change what was intended and put the story in a different direction?
The Clinton clan - The Rockefellers saw salvation in the rapid buildup of threats to Russia at all costs. Creating a huge single aggressive space in the southern underbelly of Russia from the Caucasus to Afghanistan, with insufficiently active opposition from Russia, could well not only create huge security problems for it, but also lead to the complete collapse of our country. It is necessary to assume that the hordes of religious militant fanatics managed to cross the mountains to the Great Steppe on such a broad front, and our country would have been waiting for a war more terrible than the Great Patriotic.
The key to starting this scenario was the fall of Iran. And here you can remember the persistence of Israel in recent years has led the United States to war against this state. By all means, including even aerial bombardment of objects on its territory.
And the key to the attack on Iran was the fall of Syria. While Assad's radars are capable of monitoring the airspace over their own country, a successful attack on Iran for a potential coalition was not at all guaranteed. And failure could easily lead to unpredictable consequences for both Israel and the United States. The death of Israel and the loss of American influence in the Middle East would be the least of the evils. This is, so to speak, a geopolitical factor with a military bias.
Asad’s stubbornness led the Clinton clan to begin the creation of a Caliphate not in all the previously planned space, but in its relatively controlled part in Iraq with the transition to Syria. At the same time, under the influence of Obama’s resistance, there was a change in the script itself. Now under the immediate threat was not Russia, but Saudi Arabia. The war with Iran was supposed to turn into a religious war between the Sunnis and the Shiites. For this, even a provocation was carried out with the explosion of the situation in Yemen. The simultaneous lifting of sanctions on Iran was to solve two urgent problems. Eliminate direct US involvement in hostilities, as well as strengthen Iran by unblocking its oil trade so that it can win the war against KSA. Then the United States planned to destroy the weakened winner under the guise of a peacekeeping operation. As a result, the entire Middle East would become a gigantic space of chaos, not controlled by anyone and nothing. As a result, Russia would be seriously and for a long time occupied by the suppression of this chaos on its southern borders, and the United States could once again reap the laurels of the winner by proxy. For this, even Israel would be sacrificed, at the same time eliminating for the US a source of huge and unnecessary country spending. And to tidy up Europe completely, controlling at the same time Russia's revenues from energy supplies to it.
According to open sources, it is extremely difficult to judge all the nuances of a secret policy and the negotiations held between all parties. But anyway, Iran did not go into a trap. He accepted the sacrifice in the form of the lifting of sanctions, but is not yet seeking to fight with KSA. The Saudis themselves found themselves in a dual position. Understanding perfectly well that their salvation is no longer in US support, but quite the contrary, they sharply reduced support for Syrian rebels, and at the same time tried to stop Iran’s activity in Yemen.
As for ISIS, the United States has driven itself into a kind of trap. After it turned out that Russia had leverage over Turkey, preventing its direct participation in ground operations in Syria, the United States urgently needed an armed mass capable of destroying the remnants of Syrian statehood. On the territory of Syria itself, there were not enough people, it was necessary to connect Iraq. This is how ISIS was born. There is more than enough evidence on the same network that it is the United States that is behind the creation, financing and arming of ISIS. But at the same time, the United States cannot publicly declare its support for ISIS without a cardinal loss of image. After all, it is their own henchmen sitting in power in Iraq. And the external image of ISIS is so disgusting for any civilized person that open support is suicidal for any respectable politician.
As a result, the United States declared a public war of ISIS in approximately the same way as in 39, England and France declared war on Hitler without making any real effort. And if we add to all this the continuing need for the development and financing of ISIS and the blatant illegality of any actions by the United States and the coalition in the region from the point of view of international law, then it becomes clear the depth of the abyss that the United States has dug. But this gap could have remained covered for some time with a fig leaf, if not for one “but”. This "but" - the actions of Russia.
Here it is necessary to highlight a few points. First, the exact time selected. Despite the loud howl of “patriots” of all stripes, Russia managed to almost completely stop the situation in the Donbas. Today, the possibility of a sharp escalation of military confrontation in Ukraine is reduced to almost zero. And the sluggish development of the situation in this country is in the hands of Russia. Today, neither from the United States, nor from the side of Europe drowning in the flows of refugees, Ukraine should not wait for substantial financial assistance. And for almost two years of power, the junta brought its own economic situation to complete incapacity. Today, the survival of Ukraine is only a matter of assistance from Russia, and no one else. This explains the panic and the amazing "schizophrenia" of the statements and actions of politicians in Kiev. And this assistance is provided, but exactly to the extent not to allow a new round of civil war.
Freedom from problems in Ukraine allowed Moscow to move to more active actions in Syria. And here, too, there are three levels of tasks and goals.
The first and most obvious is the indicative legitimate use of force. If this use of force is also effective, and there is almost no doubt about it, then in a fairly quick time (months) Syria has every chance of restoring full-fledged statehood. Of course, this will require wisdom from the side of Assad. Compromise with those with whom, in principle, it is possible to reach an agreement, granting autonomy to the Kurds, and so on. But for the whole world it will be a demonstration of effective power from Russia. Against this background, the position of the United States will look extremely pale, even within the political crisis, signs of which are already observed in the political circles of the United States. Obama is already trying in every way to distance himself from what Clinton and his comrades have done in the Middle East. And thus virtually eliminate it from the presidential race that has begun.
The second level of tasks that Russia solves in Syria is the control of the coast. Given the landscape in Syria, there are not many places where a gas pipeline can be laid across its territory to the Mediterranean coast. This is the valley of the Bekaa River. And its control areas of Tartus and Latakia. The Russian bases in these areas actually take control of all possible points of the gas pipeline construction. An alternative route is possible only on the territory of Israel, but this option is unacceptable for the latter. Too high risks for its own statehood.
Finally, there is a third, most serious level. It seems that an agreement was reached with Assad on the creation of full-fledged Russian military bases on the territory of Syria. Naval in Tartus and military in Latakia. And this event, if held already global geopolitical values. From the 18 of the 20th century, Russia sought to emerge from the Black Sea to the expanses of the Mediterranean. And each time her efforts were blocked by the West. Base in Syria is the complete control of the Mediterranean region. Moreover, the entire infrastructure of NATO is aimed at repelling threats only from the North. The flight time from Syria to Italy is just 20 minutes. Gibraltar - 30 minutes. About the control of Suez and not have to say. The importance of Turkey as a member of NATO is practically reduced to zero. And the same Egypt is already in full demonstrating its loyalty and friendliness towards Russia. In this context, rumors about selling Mistral to Egypt look interesting.
What is most interesting, all these plans of Russia are obvious to the USA. But it is much more curious that the United States does not even try to seriously hinder these plans. The enemies of Russia even began to shout that this Russia is acting on the order of the United States, playing into their hands. But everything is different. Both Russia and the United States, represented by Obama, are still acting within the framework of the strategy of the Global TC. The United States relinquishes control over the Middle East of Russia, while simultaneously trying to finally subjugate Europe to itself. But already as an elementary colony, allowing the United States to nest in the framework of the "Atlantic partnership" and recover in this self-isolation after a long economic self-destruction.
If you look at the chronology, then from May-June, the time when, apparently, the final decision was made on Syria (remember Kerry’s “historic” visit to Sochi?), All actions by the United States and Russia are more or less coordinated. The United States is reducing its activity in Ukraine, but at the same time initiating a massive invasion of refugees to Europe. At the same time, the debt market of the EU through Greece is being tested for strength, and recently they are setting up an exemplary spanking of one of the largest European companies - Volkswagen. At the same time, any actions of Russia to increase aid to Syria are indicatively ignored.
The external cold tone in relations between Russia and the United States should not deceive anyone. In addition to the "realpolitik", there is also a public policy, designed for an internal audience. Today, it can be stated that it is very likely that the United States will leave the Middle East as the leading Player. And the main indicator of this is not even Russia's activity in Syria, but the creation of a focal point in Iraq. Iraq is also leaving American influence. In its place comes Russia and partly Iran.
But the game is not over yet. Ahead of a new round, the round of the struggle for Europe. And here, while the US is ahead of Russia by several steps. But even the mention of casual problems of secret backroom unions in Putin’s speech from the UN podium suggests that Russia is not only aware of these plans, but is also ready for active opposition. Another thing is whether there is enough time and resources for this. But in any case, it will be another story.
In the meantime, there is a process of manifestation of geopolitical decisions of the GAC in the Middle East. The process of manifestation of geopolitical greatness of Russia. And, which is very significant, in full accordance with the norms of international law.