Obama offered Putin a "new military partnership" in Syria

75
The US president offered Moscow a new military partnership in Syria. This was reported by the foremost mouthpiece of democracy - the newspaper The Washington Post. The Russians were promised military cooperation in exchange for the cessation of bombing attacks on “rebels”, that is, on those “opposition” groups that are approved by the United States.



For details, refer to the source - edition «The Washington Post».

The article by Josh Rogin (Josh Rogin) from 30 June tells that the B. H. Obama administration proposed a new agreement on Syria to the Russian government. We are talking about the deepening of military cooperation between the two states, aimed at combating some terrorist groups, in exchange for the cessation by Asad of the bombing of those rebel groups that are supported by the White House.

Washington has already transmitted (on Monday) the text of the proposed agreement to members of the Russian government. This happened after several weeks of negotiations and internal discussions in the Obama administration. The information came to D. Rogin directly from the representative of the Obama administration.

The essence of the deal: the United States promises to join forces with the Russian Air Force to find targets and coordinate actions against Dzhebhat al-Nusra, the Al-Qaida branch in Syria, which is fighting mainly with the government of Bashar al-Assad.

According to this proposal, which was personally endorsed by President Obama and largely supported by Secretary of State Kerry, the cooperation of the American and Russian military will reach an "unprecedented level." This is exactly what Russia was “striving for for a long time,” the correspondent notes.

In return, the Russians should agree to put pressure on the “Assad regime” and convince him to stop attacking those Syrian rebel groups that the United States does not consider terrorist.

The United States will not give Russia the coordinates of the exact location of these groups, however, they will indicate geographical areas that should be secured "against air attacks of the Assad regime."

Further, the publication notes that US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter was against this plan. This was reported by officials (the names are not given). But in the end, Carter "was forced to agree with the decision of the president."

Many people, both in the presidential administration and outside, are distressed by the White House’s decision on Syria. It is believed that the new plan is "deeply erroneous."

For example, the former US ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, says the plan has one “big flaw”. It lies in the fact that the Russians are not going to put pressure on Assad, "it's obvious." Even when the Russians exerted some kind of pressure, they got “minimal results” from the Syrians.

There is another drawback. How to distinguish quite clearly "Dzhebhat an-Nusru" from other rebel groups? They are often close by, noted Ford. And even if the Syrians agreed not to bomb certain zones, there would still be no way to stop Dzhebhat al-Nusru and other groups: they would move and adapt.

Ford does not see any sense in this regard. F-16 aircraft and bombs will not solve the problem of extremist groups, the former diplomat is sure.

One unnamed representative of the White House administration argues that this plan does not provide for any “consequences” for either Russia or the Assad regime if they do not fulfill the promises of the deal.

Earlier, Secretary of State D. Kerry had threatened Assad for several months with some kind of Plan B, which the US will use if Assad does not observe the current cease-fire. Plan "B" provided for the strengthening of the weapons of the Syrian rebels. But the White House now threw this plan “B” in the trash and preferred it to a plan leading to the benefit of Russia. "Rebels" from this will be worse, but Assad, of course, better.

Finally, Vladimir Putin. For him, such changes in military cooperation are recognition of the importance of the role of Russia and a way to gradually weaken the "isolation" of Moscow.

That is why Minister Carter initially objected to the new plan, officials told the journalist.

State Department spokesman John Kirby declined to comment on the specifics of this proposal. At the same time, he defended its basic principles, emphasizing the "threat" coming from al-Qaida.

One senior official from the US presidential administration told a journalist that the road to military escalation would most likely not lead to a final result in Syria. “This is, in essence, a stalemate,” he concluded.

The journalist concludes: the Obama administration is trying (for obvious reasons) to find some way to save its own policy in Syria. After all, Obama is left to rule in a matter of months.

As stated earlier by the representative of the Pentagon Matthew Allen, the memorandum of understanding between the ministries of defense of Russia and the United States "works effectively." As recalled RIA News"Mr. Allen emphasized that Washington does not plan joint military operations with Russia in Syria and does not discuss issues of military cooperation.

According to the official, the United States will continue to help the “local forces” fighting the “Islamic State” (prohibited in Russia).

Thus, we add, there are big changes in the position of Washington regarding the policy of cooperation in Russia in Syria. More recently, some US administrative officials boasted about how thoroughly Mr. Obama “isolated” Russia. About this, in particular, the other day, said the official representative of the White House, Eric Schulz, who told the world about the "maximum isolation" of Russia for all the latest history and noted that the merit of such "isolation" belongs to the "international leadership" of President Obama.

Today, all of a sudden, the White House itself has broken its own “isolation” and is ready to make agreements with Russia. Not without reason the draft of the new agreement is criticized not only at the level of experts, but also at the level of the Pentagon.

Mr. Obama, the “lame duck,” rushes about, not knowing how to rectify the situation in Syria, which in fact is a historical example of his political failure, on the throne in the remaining few months. Obama always liked to make long speeches, to make pretentious statements, he always dreamed to go down in history. It seems that instead of going down in history, he left to plunge.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
  • http://photocorrespondent.com
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

75 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +31
    July 1 2016
    He needs to answer: We need to think hard about all this, and come on, friend Barack, we will return to this issue in six months.
    1. +6
      July 1 2016
      The "lame duck" rushes about, not knowing how over the remaining few months on the throne ...


      On the throne?

      More likely on a chair, besides on a liquid.
      1. +4
        July 1 2016
        As soon as the Victory is near, the United States immediately stuffs into allies .. As everything is corny and familiar (the Turks are the same))))
        1. +14
          July 1 2016
          Quote: Chariton
          As soon as the Victory is near, the United States immediately stuffs into allies .. As everything is corny and familiar (the Turks are the same))))

          Always like this! And from this plan: "You do not bomb our terrorists, and we - cooperation for you" smells like a "scam" a mile away, forgive the jargon.
        2. +3
          July 1 2016
          Hariton! 08.57. The USA operates according to the method of twig and broom. Having broken the countries on a stick, they collect them in a broom of ISIS. And with this broom they were going to revenge. And so that we do not get the whole twig, they are going to share it (twig). That is the whole point of their proposals. If you take the whole BV. There our victory is not near. American is, ours is not. Americans gathered their forces under the banners of ISIS. And under what banners have we gathered our strength? We didn’t even conquer Syria. And we are not allowed to conquer it both by military and diplomatic means. hi
          1. +1
            July 1 2016
            Of course, where do we go against enlightened America, VV has realized his mistakes and is preparing to swear ISIS (he will stroke the shoelaces only)
        3. 0
          July 1 2016
          Alas, it often happens that the victory of some annoys their "friends", remember world history!
    2. 0
      July 1 2016
      Let this US citizen who puts his hand to an empty head cooperates with the same empty-headed clever people in Europe. And we somehow decide without them what is better for us.
      1. 0
        July 1 2016
        Quote: Denis Obukhov
        And we somehow decide without them what is better for us.

        Nobody really asks us, they will step on the tail and there will be another truce, no one has called the Americans to Syria and the UN Permission has not given and they dictate the conditions there.
    3. +2
      July 1 2016
      I don’t want to offend the Americans, but I have to, because of their "supreme". "In return, Russia should convince the government of Bashar al-Assad to stop bombing US-backed rebels."
      In exchange for WHAT ?! What is the NEW AGREEMENT on Syria ?! Are all the old ones already done?
      Some kind of nonsense ... They will offer something, and ... SILENCE! We told them: oooh! So will ISIS wet? SILENCE again ...
      For all offers or refusal, or silence.
      So again about the white bull ????
      We to them: Take your "opposition" or give their coordinates, so as not to cover. Renouncement.
      And what do they call the AGREEMENT ???
      And, most importantly, all the time there are some conditions.
      As they said in the village: "It is good to eat with such people, everyone strives to scoop up more." Thank you gentlemen! Excuse me ...
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. 0
      July 1 2016
      Americans know better Assad who is Syria's enemy? Removed the hated Gaddafi and where is Libya now?
      1. +2
        July 1 2016
        Libya was the only state with strict centralization, like Iraq, and now ... in my opinion there are only geographical names and that’s all. If wrong, kill
    6. 0
      July 1 2016
      Quote: Holsten
      He needs to answer: We need to think hard about all this, and come on, friend Barack, we will return to this issue in six months.

      Obama is no longer deciding anything, he needs to earn some time, that's the trick. The new administration will come and will build relations and this agreement will be quietly merged, now you need to drag out any time.
      The Americans calmly refuse more significant treaties at the international level, so conclude something with Obama ?????????????????
  2. +3
    July 1 2016
    Yes, Obama's mattresses again come up under the guise of cooperation with some kind of meanness like Erdogan - you can’t believe them
    1. +1
      July 1 2016
      But do not poppies grow there in front of the White House? Dope however! And we are surprised!
  3. +7
    July 1 2016
    Yes, in no case not be fooled by this nonsense. it's a mousetrap. how many such tricks we have swallowed. we must work in the same mode_ to iron everyone and everyone who is against the legitimate government of Syria.
  4. +3
    July 1 2016
    Sneak up sentences and not come up with. Mania of grandeur makes even smart people stupid, and even the not-so-distant Obama is completely Baran. Does he seriously believe that loshars are sitting in our general staff? We won’t tell you where, but there and there is a reserve. Red Book banduks breed. You can’t touch them. Yeah, man!
  5. 0
    July 1 2016
    They will indicate the territory, yeah, such as the entire territory of the SAR, not controlled by Assad, and the rest Mona to bomb wassat . But Cho, the robots were used to think on a large scale, they had done it before, for sure the exact coordinates, think, a couple of weddings, and three or four excavators, well, the hospital is still there, some kind of hooks. We decided that the other way around
  6. +1
    July 1 2016
    Both on! It turns out he already sees us as negotiating partners, and not just an object for sanctions. We are on the right track, comrades!
    1. +5
      July 1 2016
      Quote: vladimirvn
      Both on! It turns out he already sees us as negotiating partners, and not just an object for sanctions. We are on the right track, comrades!

      The main insulator cracked)))
      1. +1
        July 1 2016
        Bear negotiator, and Like who?
        1. +4
          July 1 2016
          Bear negotiator, and Like who?

          This is a representative from Kozhugetovich soldier
  7. +4
    July 1 2016
    Hollow out all the "formations" that have not joined the ceasefire agreement! Regardless of where and by whom they are funded! After their complete destruction, it will be possible to talk about the further fate of Assad and Syria as a whole, including the Americans. A kind of "zero option".
  8. +3
    July 1 2016
    Some kind of crap .. We don’t love these ones .. let them wet them together, but we love these, don’t touch them, they will come in handy to the USA, so that Assad would be overthrown ..
  9. +1
    July 1 2016
    Thanks for the "generous" offer. Sorry, but no fools.
    1. +1
      July 1 2016
      Quote: BerBer
      Sorry but no fools.

      I’m afraid that in this situation they can be found. I do not like the words of the darkest that Russia is always ready for dialogue and cooperation. I would like more integrity. In addition, there are indeed many questions on which there can be no dialogue. For example, it’s not painful to talk with us about missile defense ...
      Quote: "... to put pressure on" the Assad regime "to stop attacking those Syrian rebel groups that the United States does not consider terrorist."
      And why, excuse me, should care who the US considers terrorists and who is not on the territory of a sovereign state? Now, if the hostilities took place in the United States, then yes ... But as they say, "we'll figure it out without snotty ..."
  10. 0
    July 1 2016
    In return, the Russians should agree to put pressure on the “Assad regime” and convince him to stop attacking those Syrian rebel groups that the United States does not consider terrorist.

    Yes, it’s easy, no one doesn’t mind letting them lay down their arms.
  11. +1
    July 1 2016
    The first fruits of the letter of the Turkish Sultan?
  12. 0
    July 1 2016
    Why do they think that Putin and Russia need a recognition of importance in the eyes of someone. This is not Yeltsin, who, with piggy joy, broadcast that we are friends and partners.
  13. +4
    July 1 2016
    How to clearly distinguish Jebhat al-Nusra from other rebel groups? They are often nearby, Ford noted. And even if the Syrians agreed not to bomb certain zones, there is still no way to stop the Jebhat al-Nusra and other groups: they will move and adapt.

    Ford does not see any sense in this regard. F-16 aircraft and bombs will not solve the problem of extremist groups, the former diplomat is sure.


    And this Ford is not at all durak. And indeed, Americans become fools as soon as they enter the civil service. And so they reasonably reason.
  14. 0
    July 1 2016
    Assad’s army is the only legal army, everyone else with weapons must be destroyed, it’s so easy to understand even at the international level.
  15. 0
    July 1 2016
    This is a Baboon democracy that understands that it will lose in Syria if it does not find contact with us. But the plans of the Jesuit baboon: to create such an opposition, or rather a terrorist group, which will help divide Syria into parts. And therefore, there should be no talk with the United States on this topic. Let the black rubbish decide these questions directly with Assad, with Syria
    1. 0
      July 1 2016
      Anshonsha! 08.58. They just want to give us our ration where we will graze our cattle, and the rest of the field will be theirs. They see us as a threat and try to block our progress. Whether we stop or not depends on the venality of our management. If you think strategically, we will not stop. If it’s mercantile, let’s hand over how we surrendered Gaddafi. Amer’s control over the oil fields of BV is not at all profitable for us. Let them be controlled by amers through ISIS, this does not change anything. Amer’s manual, Arabic execution. Given the poverty in their controlled territories, oil will cost a mere penny. Given the lion's share of our exports of hydrocarbons, we face a budget deficit. And the lack of funds in the budget promises us a fun, quote, life.
  16. +1
    July 1 2016
    They march us for fools. They don’t even try to hide somehow the meanness of this agreement. Either the brains were completely softened in the corridors of the White House, or they themselves convinced that everyone around was stupid and they were all white, fluffy and smart.
  17. 0
    July 1 2016
    The United States will not give Russia coordinates for the exact location of these groups, but will indicate geographical areas

    And here the United States is trying to be the most cunning. But for the tricky ... there is always something with a screw.
  18. 0
    July 1 2016
    Damn, just like a louse on a scallop and so on. Here is black-backed .....
  19. 0
    July 1 2016
    In fact, the United States has been successful in Syria.
    1) the US Air Force calmly bombing whom they consider necessary;
    2) Russia has reasons to reduce the videoconferencing group;
    3) on land offensive-counterattack
    4) Assad + Iran + Russia resisted, but did not win.

    The Assad proposal is unacceptable. He's an ally. This is not a proposal - it is a threat to permanently "make mistakes" during bombing.
  20. 0
    July 1 2016
    (The United States will not give Russia coordinates for the exact location of these groups, but will indicate geographical areas.)
    And for this nothing, there must be concessions. So it’s as if nobody sees geographical zones without them. Another noisy nonsense. Bomb everyone with illegal weapons in their hands.
  21. +1
    July 1 2016
    But in general, what kind of USA are they doing in Syria? they didn’t seem to be called there. maybe fuck you send (politely and diplomatically)
  22. -1
    July 1 2016
    Obamo naive? The Americans played for hegemon, tired of all the serious political figures in the world. They will not surrender Syria, not for that we are fighting there.
  23. 0
    July 1 2016
    As the GDP said, where is the guarantee that they will not throw us again?
  24. +1
    July 1 2016
    Obama offered Putin a "new military partnership" in Syria

    Type: do not touch the pzhalst of our thugs-bandits, whom we trained and provided with everything necessary for the overthrow of Assad.
    Well, kaaaneshn, right now, stroke the shoelaces and allow your bandits to destroy the sovereign state of our ally in the region. angry
  25. 0
    July 1 2016
    Americans are afraid of being late and not becoming one of the winners, and offer a second front.
    Help will not hurt, the Kremlin will figure out what to do right!
  26. 0
    July 1 2016
    Send! Polite, but firm. Believes cannot be trusted for a penny.
  27. -1
    July 1 2016
    Mr. Obama, The Lame Duck I would have taken care of what was going on under his nose:The hashtag #Texit (similar to the British Brexit) began to spread actively on social networks. Twitter users urge state governor Greg Abbott to take action by accompanying their posts with US maps without Texas ...

    ... The New York Times notes that the American region of New England was also influenced by Brexit. Residents of Manchester, New Hampshire, on Sunday held a small rally demanding to support NHexit. The Vermont Separation Movement also reported increased interest from citizens following the British referendum ... laughing

    see: http://www.vz.ru/news/2016/7/1/819066.html
  28. 0
    July 1 2016
    Cui prodest? Cui bopo? This question should be asked when dealing with practical Yankees.
    As an option, during the defeat of the igil, the opposition groups supported by the Yankees will come out.
    And how will the “new military partnership” develop?
  29. +1
    July 1 2016
    As far as I understand, the "opposition" shoots the same away from ISIS! In essence, the Americans suggested that the SAA and the Russian Armed Forces continue to butt themselves with ISIS (because their help is worse than harm) and, at the same time, also protect the opposition. Vitoghe Armed Forces of Assad are drained of blood by fighting and weakened and the "opposition" is fresh and ready to take power by force. what
  30. 0
    July 1 2016
    Such partners are worse than enemies!
    But, there is a saying: "keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer."
    The main thing is not to be stupid and soft-hearted, not to let yourself be "bred" and deceived.
  31. 0
    July 1 2016
    Obama cannot be left to the receiver of "acute" conflicts. Hence this stupid treatment.
  32. +1
    July 1 2016
    Well, in Syria, it’s not a big deal right now.

    Black knocked out CAA from 7 blocks at Palmyra and already occupy the heights from which the city itself is viewed.
    Yesterday there was news that in Latakia, Nusryata had gone to Erdogan. So, here they came back yesterday, with presents. The three-day assault on Ahrar, Nusra and Turkomanek - Kinsaba was lost, they also presented 3 T-55s and quite a lot of weapons (ATGM, rifle). And the army took it at one time with great blood and for a very long time ... And push it to the Iranians / Fatimion, Latakia is the army, the Syrian marines and the Alavite NDF.




    The Syrians on tweets (Sidorenko, Ridna, etc.) blame the Russians, they say they do not bomb, that's the result.
    1. +3
      July 1 2016
      Get it ... are the Russians to blame? Is it true or what? Maybe the Russians still have to defend the country for them, drive out all the terrorist invaders, donate 100500 tanks, allocate a lot of money, start rebuilding cities for them? As success so it is thanks to "our training", as defeat "the Russians are to blame" ...
    2. 0
      July 1 2016
      The situation there is serious, and so it is visible. As for the American proposals, in my opinion it will be necessary to seek a compromise, and with the least loss for us and Assad
  33. 0
    July 1 2016
    Oh, how much Israel depends on the United States, and Netanyahu refused Obama a visit to the United States. How are 50 US State Department employees calling for bombing Syrian government troops, Obama leaked?
    1. +2
      July 1 2016
      I would say, hell knows who depends on whom, where is the tail, where is the dog ...
  34. vv3
    +6
    July 1 2016
    Another attempt to legitimize American lawlessness. The Americans have no right to control the fate of sovereign Syria, and in this vein it is unacceptable to negotiate with them. We provide assistance to the people of Syria in the person of their legitimate government and negotiate with a third country about the fate of Syria is unacceptable. Not only to discuss the essence of the matter. proposals, but such a discussion is impossible. This is yet another provocation by the United States. It is already a mistake to talk to them about this. Let their "opposition" end the war, sit down at the negotiating table, grant their powers, what regions and how many Syrian citizens they represent. And American dummies do not pass here, no one will listen to virtual people and their overseas designers.
  35. 0
    July 1 2016
    Again, Russia must do something, some kind of one-sided proposal.
  36. 0
    July 1 2016
    The states, as soon as they are defeated on any fronts, ask for a "pardon" and a truce. Ukraine is a vivid example of a permanent truce. As soon as the DPR succeeds, the Minsk agreements 1 ... 2 ... 3 ... and so on.
  37. 0
    July 1 2016
    An old song over the ears.
  38. 0
    July 1 2016
    The Russians are promised military cooperation in exchange for the cessation of bombing strikes on to terrorists, that is, for those groups terroristsapproved by the United States.

    So it will be right.
  39. 0
    July 1 2016
    Quote: Holsten
    He needs to answer: We need to think hard about all this, and come on, friend Barack, we will return to this issue in six months.

    Or maybe so:
    1. Immediately happy to agree, verbose and flowery to tell everyone that this new era, the era of rapprochement, etc.
    2. Continue to bomb as if nothing had happened, it can even strengthen.
    3. When making claims with tears in his eyes, swear that this is not us. But we, on the contrary, with all our hearts for cooperation, are doing everything for this and even more.

    Everything is strictly in the style of "partners", pay attention. In their clearing, you should try to play by their rules.
  40. 0
    July 1 2016
    It seems that instead of going down in history, it turned out to be a mess.

    Hee hee, Mr. Obama ... And why did it only take you so long that you should always talk respectfully with Russia, and not only when, excuse me, you were pinned down?
  41. +1
    July 1 2016
    a new agreement, let them during the war with the Isis take these rebels to their homeland and then decide what to do with them!
  42. 0
    July 1 2016
    who won and who lost is not yet known, but the Jews did not succeed in hanging Assad as quickly as Gaddafi, which means that Hezbollah remains at the border with Israel Iranian oil is in the hands of the Ayatollah and it is not possible to rob it in the manner of Iraqi; and Israel and the United States are still losing a lot of dough for the further "overthrow" of Assad
    1. 0
      July 1 2016
      Hm. Is KadдAfi hanged, and even the Jews? In my opinion, the Arabs tore him up. Or I'm wrong? Remind me of the details, my illiterate druh.
  43. 0
    July 1 2016
    "Rooster" from the solarium!
  44. 0
    July 1 2016
    Tambov Wolf Obama is a comrade and partner.
  45. 0
    July 1 2016
    Any armed formations, be they rebels or the opposition (moderate of course) or US special forces in Syria, are illegal, and if they oppose the legitimate president of Syria or the Syrian army, they must be destroyed. request
  46. 0
    July 1 2016
    And what is the actual benefit for Russia? Will they indicate the direction? Our VKS are not blind kittens, what would they indicate. And cooperation for the sake of cooperation with the USA is a dubious event.
  47. 0
    July 1 2016
    First, friends.
    Obamych - this is not a duck for you. People did everything that was needed. Glinomesov and devils in S. Sh. P. legalization, including us army, which he ruined with a bang.
    Suddenly, he proved that the Bretton Woods reality was n $% & nullied with a copper basin.
    In a word, do not do what the enemy wants from you.
    Uncle Volodya, don't be fooled.
    And if seduced, not nashty
  48. -1
    July 1 2016
    Alumina stirred or worms in it?
  49. 0
    July 1 2016
    Again, why not be, what would then blame us.
  50. 0
    July 1 2016
    Lamb's friend promises something completely muddy in exchange for something he needs and specific.
  51. 0
    July 1 2016
    As soon as Finland joins NATO, we must immediately send STATUS to the shores of the United States. It would be stupid to bother with small things. Even the sworn psheks, finding themselves without the US, will crawl to Russia in tears... And we will already be taught how to talk to the Poles-Croats-Montenegrins...
  52. 0
    July 2 2016
    The US military is illegally present in Syria, what kind of partnership are we talking about?
    The maximum that Americans can count on is not to fall under the hot hand of the Russian Aerospace Forces.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"