Igor Pankratenko: Syria and Assad personally for the USA is not an end in itself, otherwise everything would have been resolved quickly enough

Igor Pankratenko: Syria and Assad personally for the USA is not an end in itself, otherwise everything would have been resolved quickly enough



The situation around Syria and the processes occurring in the Middle East, still occupy a significant niche in the global media space. The fate of Syria is of great interest in the world, and in the expert community. In this regard, we have prepared an interview with a Russian specialist, candidate of historical sciences, a member of the expert community of “Russian Network Intelligence” - Igor Pankratenko.

Russian support for Bashar Assad gave him confidence, and increased the role of Assad in the eyes of the West - exactly like his legitimacy. Do you think this will encourage the US and Europe to engage in dialogue with him? Or will they continue, as before, to insist on their own and ignore the Syrian President?

The ultimate goal of the United States and its allies in Europe and the region is the removal of Bashar al-Assad from power. It will remain unchanged and in this respect there should be no illusions. This is the first. The second - the former Syria, Syria Assad, no longer exists and a return to the status quo, the state before the beginning of the civil war and external intervention, is impossible. These two theses are strategic axioms for Washington and its allies in the anti-Syrian coalition. But then political tactics begin, in which the most diverse combinations are possible.

In my opinion, Syria and Assad personally for the USA is not an end in itself, otherwise everything would have been resolved quickly enough. Damascus is one of the points at which the redistribution of spheres of influence in the Middle East takes place, involving international and regional actors, as well as local elites. Their main goal in Syria, let's speak frankly, is in principle achieved. The powerful state, which was a serious obstacle to the plans of the United States, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, is no more. From Tehran’s strategic ally, Damascus has become a strategic burden, which cannot be left behind, and it’s not enough to restore it as before - neither military nor economic resources are enough.

But in parallel with the redistribution of spheres of influence in the region, there is a complex process of forming a new system of checks and balances, during which a lot of difficult questions arise that the American ruling elites simply do not have a ready answer now. What is more profitable - to complete the "Syrian campaign" with one powerful cast of the coalition, or to preserve the current chaos for a while, during which competent authorities of the "secular opposition" will be prepared? Does Syria need to be preserved as a single state within the previous borders? Who will take responsibility for the "production of security" among the local tribes, the Syrian Kurds, and so on? How far can you "put" Turkey and the Saudis in Syria? And so on, there are a lot of questions for the USA.

There is a view in the Washington corridors of power that Assad may well be temporarily left as the leader of one of the fragments of the once united state. Until such time as there are people in his environment who are capable of carrying out a coup and starting the “transformation of the regime” in the direction set by the USA. That is, the question of the fate of Assad - he must leave - in general, resolved. Methods to eliminate it are still being discussed.

If the Assad army, with the help of Iran and Russia, still succeeds in clearing its territory from ISIL and other Islamist groups, what will be the fate of the Kurdish territories, where they have de facto created American quasi-state with American support? Does their fate await Iraqi Kurdistan? Or Assad will not tolerate the state within the state?

I repeat once again - my attitude toward the ultimate success of Assad, even with the help of Iran and Russia, is very skeptical. Simply put - I do not believe in it. The changes in the country have become irreversible. And the maximum possible that Damascus can do is to regain control over a number of territories.

Regarding specifically the areas where Syrian Kurds live, in particular, the information about the announcement of the Kurdish Syrian city of Gyra Spi (Tel Abyad) by the new part of the autonomous self-government system of the “Syrian Kurdistan” (there are three of them in northern Syria), view, not the government of Damascus, but in the framework of negotiations between the US and Turkey. And the main question here is who will lead: PYD (the Democratic Union party, supporting Assad and associated with Ankara's opponent - the Kurdish Workers Party recognized in Turkey, the US and the EU as a terrorist organization) or more moderate elements associated with Iraqi Kurdistan.

As you remember, in March 2015, the Minister of Information of Syria, Omran Zoghbi, said that Damascus "considers it possible to recognize Kurdish autonomy within the framework of the law and the Constitution." However, in my opinion, part of the Syrian Kurds are far from being able to believe Damascus recklessly.

Throughout the twentieth century, to one extent or another, there were hotbeds of tension in the Gulf region, and they did not disappear anywhere in the twenty-first century. Some experts believe that the greatest danger for the region is the tension between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Do you think this tension could result in a full-scale war?

I think the direct military clash between Tehran and Riyadh is from the realm of fantasy. But the fact that these two countries lead a full-scale “cold war”, which periodically in the territory of “third countries” develops into a “hot” - a reality that in the medium term will determine the development of events in the Middle East.

In Saudi Arabia, serious reforms are underway now, the transfer of power to a new generation of politicians is being prepared, which, no doubt, will act against Tehran no less harshly than their predecessors. At the same time, they are not betting on full-scale conflict, but on proxy wars and special operations throughout the Middle East.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

26 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Zoldat_A 29 October 2015 05: 38 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    In my opinion, Syria and Assad personally are not an end in themselves for the United States, otherwise everything would have been resolved quickly enough.
    Haha "Fast!" We all remember how quickly, 638 times, the US "resolved the issue" with Fidel. And with Syria as a whole, Russia didn’t give a quick answer to the question a couple of years ago, despite the fact that Barak Husseinich really wanted ...

    Yesterday Zheleznyak correctly said that we must first deal with Isil and then divide Syria, place the Kurds somewhere and reconcile the Saudis with Iran. This is all secondary. They will figure it out themselves. The main thing is not to interfere. The latter is no longer even a stone, but a good plop in the USA garden ...
    1. Varyag_1973 29 October 2015 10: 40 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Such iksperds are touching me! The mattress “Assad must leave” sounds as often and with the same hatred as the ancient Romans spell that “Carthage must be destroyed”! And then another liberal pepper appears and with a smart look begins to hang us "noodles on the ears" that if the mattresses wanted, they would have long ago ...! Why what ?! Their gut was thinner, and the Faberge was not iron at the most exceptional black on the planet! Therefore, now they are only squealing like parasites undercut, in all corners and in all the media, that Russia is not bombing those, they are not bombing correctly and this is not the case with Russia at all!

      "SHCHAZ", mowing bite! Fuck you walrus, not Assad with Syria! An iron stump on your collar from the Soviet (Russian) government, so that the neck does not bend and the gateway does not get dirty!
  2. mig31 29 October 2015 05: 46 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Skepticism is an axiomatic, the irreversibility is that Russia is already resolving its geopolitical issues in the Middle East, and this is "dashing" for the arrogant Saxons and it is not recommended to wake him, there will be nowhere to hide from the punishing sword of justice ....
  3. venaya 29 October 2015 05: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    the question of the fate of Assad - he must leave - is basically resolved. Methods for its elimination are still being discussed.

    And how does this approach differ from direct intervention methods?
    The impudence of today's politicians is off the charts, I haven’t noticed something like this in international relations, everything was in more decent colors.
    1. Zoldat_A 29 October 2015 05: 57 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Quote: venaya
      the question of the fate of Assad - he must leave - is basically resolved. Methods for its elimination are still being discussed.
      Quote: venaya
      And how does this approach differ from direct intervention methods?

      And even more interesting - Who gave the West the right to resolve such issues?

      Once upon a time, in my youth, my first coach warned me against excessive zeal in training, leading to injuries - "Even with a big mouth you need to bite off little by little. Otherwise, choke ..." Does it never seem to America that they have already bitten off so much that neither chew nor swallow? And most importantly - and sorry to spit it out ...
  4. Kos_kalinki9 29 October 2015 05: 55 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The boss is all gone, the plaster is removed, the client leaves. America over the mustache. Somewhere like that.
    1. afdjhbn67 29 October 2015 07: 22 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Russia made its move .. And to assume that after this Assad will quickly defeat everyone and everything will be as before hardly even the most inveterate optimist assumes, all the more so sober politician as Putin. And the author suggests understanding the multi-vector forces. And the struggle is not for the whole of Syria so far, but for the coast and the oil-bearing regions who will keep this at their place, and the "king of the hill"
      And the adversaries have not yet made their move .. but the fact that the answer will be to Grandma Vanga do not go.
  5. sa-ag 29 October 2015 07: 11 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The question is how many parts will Syria be divided - 2, 3?
    1. Gani 29 October 2015 08: 38 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      maybe more, but the question and answer are not unambiguous.
      The question is how many parts has Libya divided or is it a whole country? And Iraq, Afghanistan - they all seem to be within their borders just not whole and not divided.
      1. sa-ag 29 October 2015 12: 58 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Gani
        The question is how many parts Libya divided

        Well, somewhere in two, Iraq is the same, with Afghanistan there is something similar
    2. veksha50 29 October 2015 10: 59 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: sa-ag
      The question is how many parts will Syria be divided - 2, 3?



      So far, from the window of my kitchen, at least two are visible in the forecast ... This is with the most positive outcome of this war ...

      And so ... You can’t let the country split into parts ... Otherwise, there was nothing for Russia to get involved there ...

      Putin bluntly said: the goal of Russian aid is to preserve the constitutional integrity of the state of Syria ...
      1. sa-ag 29 October 2015 12: 58 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: veksha50
        So far, from the window of my kitchen, at least two are visible in the forecast ...

        I once thought of three - Kurds, Alawites and the rest
        1. veksha50 29 October 2015 20: 20 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: sa-ag
          I once thought of three - Kurds, Alawites and the rest



          So I said - two, with the best outcome ... Although Putin (and in his person - Russia) seeks to preserve Syria completely undivided ...
  6. Wolka 29 October 2015 07: 19 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    horseradish radish is not sweeter, it is the eternal struggle of the Persians with the Saudis, plus the Turks squeak, but climb, and the whole struggle for hegemony in the region, which is now more and more emerging and comes to the fore, Syria, Iraq become a side effect, the Yankees themselves are at a loss as to ensure control over all this democratically militant Islam ...
    1. Azitral 29 October 2015 12: 30 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      NOT eternal. This Persia showed itself as a constant center of civilization, which has not completely faded for more than three thousand years. And KSA is a brand new, largely artificial state. education. With the old cultures, even the Anglo-Saxons do not succeed: one way or another, they turn out, continue to maintain their identity.
  7. A-Sim 29 October 2015 08: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It seems that having forgotten to take an interest in the Kremlin’s opinion, one can greatly be surprised at the consequences. Once again.
  8. anderles66 29 October 2015 09: 44 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    There are a lot of categorical statements, and right off the bat, so that no one even has time to think.
    The ultimate goal of the United States and its allies in Europe and the region is the removal of Bashar al-Assad from power. It will remain unchanged and in this respect there should be no illusions.
    And what was the initial goal? What made Assad a target? Dictatorship? Do not tell my horseshoes. The undemocratic countries of the Arabian Peninsula live on their own and do not bother with democracy. Moreover, they ahead of the planet declared Assad an enemy. The same Turkey kissed Assad right up until 2011. And now they are bombing the Kurds and no one is making any claims against her. What am I doing? The target is not Assad at all, as a person. This is somehow shallow. Just like in Iraq, the goal was not Saddam at all (or does anyone have any illusions about this?) Moreover, the Alavite community is strong there (a community that cannot be destroyed by the disappearance of the leader), which is now fighting for survival entirely, and not for power, while there were no religious (precisely religious) problems there.
  9. lopvlad 29 October 2015 09: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Their main goal in Syria, let's talk frankly, is basically achieved. A powerful state, which was a serious obstacle to the plans of the USA, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, is no more.

    what if they have achieved their goal so hysterical and furious? or maybe they don’t know something about themselves and they need to read Igor Pankratenko?
  10. veksha50 29 October 2015 10: 53 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "Occurred in the country changes are irreversible. And the maximum possible that Damascus can do is to regain control over a number of territories "...

    Hmm ... I don’t think Putin got involved in this war on Assad’s side, without thinking a thousand times over the pros and cons ...

    Now, by and large, not so much Assad is fighting for his power, but Russia is showing its capabilities as a geopolitical actor who has returned to the stage of the geopolitical theater, renewed and with renewed forces ...

    Yes, our strength is still not enough, but this battle of Russia cannot be lost ... Our further position and weight in the world depends on it ...

    And for the United States and the Arab gang, Russia's act added confusion to their ranks, destroyed plans ... If everything had been so bad for Assad and Russia, there would have been so much stench from the United States and their packs ...

    And the fact that the United States and its coalition refuse the request of Turkey to create a no-fly zone over the Turkish-Syrian border, says a lot ...
  11. uhu189 29 October 2015 10: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quite a sober analysis. Without embellishment. Syria in the form that it was not restored, the country, in fact, is no longer there. Our aviation now, in fact, only saves the situation and does not allow the Alavite part of the country to be captured. It would be foolish to hope that 40 aircraft can do a miracle and change everything dramatically. We were late, very late with intervention.
  12. Xanna 29 October 2015 12: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The changes in the country have become irreversible. And the maximum possible that Damascus can do is to regain control over a number of territories.


    Here I agree with the author! This is the maximum that Assad can count on. The Kurds have already tasted independence in tune with the US cookies, therefore, the restoration of Syria in its former strength is absolutely impossible. Syria is now of course a burden on one side, BUT on the other hand, the fall of Syria will turn into even bigger problems for Russia and Iran.

    Kurds for Syria are almost Ukraine for Russia, they ate cookies, had seen enough beautiful wrappers and local elites would not return to their former lives under any pretext, and the West would not allow them to infringe or force them to return under the influence of Damascus. That’s how the Ukrainians will do whatever they want.
    The only thing that unites the Kurds and the official Damascus so far is the common enemy of ISIS, and as soon as it is gone, the contradictions that inevitably arise under the taste of Amer’s cookies will emerge.
  13. NyeMoNik70 29 October 2015 12: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The peer-to-peer experts give expert estimates. Hysterics, how could it be, everything was fine, and then suddenly VKS, Russia. Yes, here you are not Ukraine, the bummer was instant. They made them hard, yes, they don’t understand it differently.
  14. Prisoner 29 October 2015 12: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Tries to say that the United States is not hurt right and wrong, otherwise everyone would have won? What a "commission creator ..." hunchbacked with a Ukrainian surname! Trying to preserve the image of the American states, but what is the point ?!
  15. Azitral 29 October 2015 12: 39 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "We are not in a hurry," "I will meet you again," "Hands reluctant to get dirty," "It didn’t hurt, I wanted to," "Yes, I feel sorry for you." The author sincerely believes in the omnipotence of the United States, and he himself does not notice that he uses formulations with roughly the meaning: "Green grapes."
    1. Zoldat_A 29 October 2015 15: 32 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Azitral
      "We are not in a hurry," "I will meet you again," "Hands reluctant to get dirty," "It didn’t hurt, I wanted to," "Yes, I feel sorry for you."

      If only our people from the same series at least once told them at the level of GDP or, at least, Lavrov: “And you answer for the“ goat? ”And make them answer. After all ....
  16. aziat 29 October 2015 13: 39 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Slurp shit from Igor Pankratenko, that's his whole message.
  17. iouris 29 October 2015 13: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The main issue is the issue of the price of oil and its transportation to the EU. You can drastically reduce the price of oil by getting rid of the population of countries that receive rents from this oil. This problem is solved by the so-called ISIS. But these are issues of life and death for Turkey and Lebanon, not only Syria and Iraq, but also for Kurds and many other national minorities. One gets the impression that diplomacy so far has carefully avoided pedaling precisely the issue of oil and its transportation to Turkey. But this is precisely the question that is pivotal. But what if one aggravates and begins to destroy the infrastructure of the illegal oil business using a "long arm"?
  18. ZAV69 29 October 2015 18: 10 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    What a one-sided article, such as decided in Washington so it will be. And the opinion of Russia, Iran, China is not taken into account at all.
    So wait and see
  19. unknown 29 October 2015 21: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The US will not have enough time. According to forecasts - the year 2025 is the limit. Next is the US regional power level of Mexico.