By Ollie Richardson
About the new, fresh out of the oven charges being brought to Russia by social media “experts” in relation to Israel, Iran, and Syria…
In the past the author of these lines wrote two other articles about how, apparently, Russia has “betrayed” Syria and/or Iran. The first article covered the topic of Russia’s “betrayal” in general, and the second article focused on the Iran-Israel affair and the early internet rumours about what will happen in South Syria.
With that refresher out the way, lets proceed with what can be called “Part 3” of this series. It should be firstly said that all the hysterics from 2 months ago about Russia “not participating” in the South Syria operations now look very, very silly. What is happening right now (at the time of writing) in Daraa, for example, was completely predictable. The “FSA” “moderate rebels” and the Nusra core are absolutely spent forces that offer their master countries absolutely nothing besides stalling inevitable geopolitical processes for a week or so.
The truth is that, as EHSANI22 justly repeats over and over again, the Syrian war ended when Russian jets touched down at Hmeymim. Russia would be working within the framework of International Law, and the speed of the liberation of the land would increase exponentially. Neither America, nor Qatar, nor Turkey, nor Saud, nor the EU, nor Israel have possessed anything that can counter this critical fact. Russia could deploy what it wants in Syria and when it wants to do it. Of course, there is a strategy involved, and every tool has its moment. For example, the time when a nuclear warhead could be deployed never arrived (and the Ministry of Defence knew it never would), and placing the S-400 in Latakia before 24th November, 2015 was simply not possible, because key pieces of the jigsaw were still missing.
Another key point to mention early on in this article is that it was Iran who engaged with Moscow the most to speak about the latter’s involvement in Syria. So when the “experts” say that “Russia betrayed Iran”, they are actually criticising Iran, since they contacted Russia for help, and thus it is Tehran’s judgement that is being called into question.
So to summarise these 2 early points: ALL parties – Russia, Syria, Iran, Hezbollah – knew what the state of affairs was in 2015 and had a very good idea of what Russian involvement would bring to the table. They knew it was the checkmate move, hence why the invitation was sent. So, now let’s move onto these charges now being thrown at Russia – at a time when the operations in South Syria are essentially over and all parties are thinking about the next 20 years.
The first charge:
“Russia demanded that Hezbollah/Iran leave Syria”
Here is a link from TASS (Russian state media) about what Putin said. The first point: notice the words “the political process”. The “experts” for some reason completely overlooked these 3 words. And it is a grave error. I.e., the vast majority of the jihadist forces on the ground have been decimated, and the ones that remain are sat in Idlib. So the so-called “opposition” has nothing more to discuss. They didn’t want to reach a compromise early in the war, and they lost in actual combat. So the logical next step is to return back to the political processes again. It is simply a fact that one day the “opposition” has to play ball and have direct dialogue with Assad about a political settlement. Not even the best chess players can invent pieces from thin air.
For reasons unknown, social media “experts” think that war is like a slot machine, and the more you criticise one of the involved parties, the more the action (entertainment) continues. This is beyond cynical and is as destructive as jihadist VBIED attacks. Secondly, why did Syria invite Iran in the first place? Ah, because the capital city – Damascus – was under the threat of being captured by the West’s proxies. So, logically speaking, if Damascus isn’t under threat/fully liberated, then Iran’s aims/objectives change.
Social media “experts” seemingly imagine a scenario where Syria and Iran are not separate countries that are both subject to international law and the interests of other countries. They actually think that a single idle Iranian soldier, twiddling his thumbs because the terrorists in the area were liquidated, leaving Syria can be called a “betrayal”. A question: why would Iran/Hezbollah leave troops inside Syria when there are no more jihadists to fight? Sure, they can be moved around to tackle the remaining pockets, but the total amount of these troops should be reduced and should correspond to the principles of “economy of force”.
“Answering reporters’ questions on which countries were meant and whether Iran was among them, the Kremlin spokesman recalled that some countries kept their soldiers and officers on Syrian soil ‘in a de facto illegitimate regime from the perspective of international law’.”
Reading the quote above from the TASS article can give anyone a good insight into fourth generation warfare – where different layers of simulacrum obfuscate the reality on the ground. The Kremlin’s statement simply reiterated international law. It can be understood as: “your version of ‘international law’ has lost; ours is now in control here”. But the social media “experts” seemingly think that Russia is scheming with Israel behind the curtain and wants to remove Iran from the picture (maybe even from Eurasia as a whole?!) in order to build Greater Israel. Again, this baseless thesis is delirium.
The truth is that Russia and Iran saw eye to eye (reported here) concerning the operations in South Syria. We are now on July 3rd, and it is now game over for Israel in Syria. Tel Aviv is afraid of losing the Golan, and Syria now has serious leverage, so Israel knows that it is better to cut its losses and hold onto what it currently has.
By the way, as a side note: the recent massacre of Palestinians committed by the IDF stained Israel’s reputation in the West so much so that it caused Tel Aviv more damage than any downed F-16 could ever do. I.e., Israel’s position is now much weaker than it was in 2011.
The next charge against Russia:
“Russia spoke with Avigdor Lieberman”
Wow! What a crime! Russia called the Defense Minister of Israel as a part of the process to settle the Syrian war. The war can be settled simply by ignoring the existence of Israel and its interests? I don’t think so. In fact, this “critique” has been covered by your loyal servant in the past. It would appear that for some social media “experts”, absolutely any dialogue between a Russian and Israeli official is a crime. Putin supports Zionism, and is to blame for killed Palestinians? Apparently, the whole world is now against Iran. Russia, America, and Israel are all bullying the Islamic Republic. And this isn’t a surprise, after all – the evil “Jewish Bolsheviks” “sponsored by the West” never left power, right? Putin and Stalin are flesh from flesh, right?
In the minds of the social media “experts”, the only thing that would negate this charge is if Russia… say… nuked Israel. Yes. A nuke. Maybe even Tsar Bomba. This will save the Middle East and we will all live happily ever after. And until Putin does this, we all have to suffer!!!
In fact, the aforementioned charge has a sub-charge:
“America and its proxies failed to overthrow Assad, but Russia saved the day by demanding that Hezbollah and Iran leaves Syria”
Confused? Well, it’s simple: apparently, Russia is working against Syria too, but, oddly enough Syria still exists and is…becoming stronger…
What isn’t said by the “pro-Russia” “experts”: Russia literally put the existence of the Russian nation on the line and entered a very high stakes arena, banking on the accuracy of the Ministry of Defence’s algorithm. The room for error was almost statistically insignificant. America had launched the Middle Eastern processes in tandem with the Ukraine process. The situation was very, very serious. But guess what? Just like the USSR did in 1941 versus Hitler’s Germany, the Russian people absorbed the blow and defeated the collective West,.
Here is another sample of the goods from the “Russia betrayed…” oven:
“Damascus is now in a bad position because Russia betrayed Iran and thus can’t rely on Russia’s long-term help”
Either a parallel universe exists, or this charge was picked out from the nose.
What is happening right now is very similar to what happened 100 years ago vis-a-vis Sykes Picot. Back then, how the global order of the next century was going to be was set in stone by the division of the Middle East (resources) into mandated territories. This order has more or less remained intact UNTIL the Syrian war started and Russia arrived. Now the “french mandate” or “Italian mandate”, or “British/US mandate” means diddly squat. In fact, today Italy sure regrets bombing Libya and would happily go back in time.
The main problem here is that there is a lack of understanding among social media users about the future. There is Brexit, JCPOA, talk of a “EU army”, potential Korean unification, the collapse of Ukraine, etc. Making sense of all these parallel processes is a very long and arduous task. And was mentioned here in the past, the very nature of social media (ADHD culture) and the Internet in general inclines users to truncate time and space to the extent that it is believed that “WW3” can be launched on Twitter on a single person’s timeline. Actually, “WW3” (a tabloid trashy term used to attract clicks and manipulate those who predominately live in fear) already happened. It is quicker to name the countries that WEREN’T involved in Syria than the ones that were. The battle for the next 50 years of global order took place. And it ended on 30.09.15 when Russia entered Syria.
And even at this moment it was known that Iran doesn’t need to deploy its regular army in Syria to counter Israel. This is why America continues to deploy the color revolution mechanism inside Iran in order to try there what they try in Russia with Navalny & Co. Israel knows very well that Iran can change the status of its existence to “404”. But in today’s world unilateral action and two-sided standoffs are becoming extinct. The consequences of globalism and tech improvements mean that combat operations are only a way of securing assets and are usually a last option, due to the risk involved.
Thus, knowing very well that America/Tel Aviv is trying to subvert Iranian society via toxic NGOs, Tehran isn’t going to give Israel what it wants and leave it’s rear (the domestic situation) vulnerable to attack. So Iran started off by banning the English language, pushing back takfirism in Syria, describing to the Houthis in Yemen how good it would be it Riyadh was pushed back and humiliated (Patriot system malfunction), etc. Actually, this scenario exists in all the main “poles” of the emerging “multi-polar” world:
- In Turkey the West has injected its own pocket politicians that use liberal slogans and try to steer Ankara away from the East. How does Turkey counter the west’s color revolution attempts? By using the situation in Iraq, Idlib, S-400 deal, Turkish Stream, the presence of a large Palestinian population in Jordan, etc as leverage;
- In China America is using the “sonic attacks” + economic subversion + Korea card to try to anchor down the Chinese caravan. How does China fight off the West’s subversion? By keeping Venezuela afloat, by attacking the West in the UNSC via vetoes, by flirting with the EU and making it clear that the dollar is almost done, etc;
- In Russia, America tries to disrupt the equilibrium in society between liberals, monarchists, communists, anarchists, banderists, “patriots”, laypeople, and just naive youth. How is Russia countering this? By ensuring that Russian agriculture is as good as it can be.
And, of course, all the countries mentioned above are involved in Yemen – an important theatre that Eurasia uses to supplement the Syrian one and counter the Libyan one.
Summary: America has switched to a strategy of attacking its opponents from the inside via NGOs. And this is now the most actual battlefield. Saying that Iran should entrench itself in Syria and that Russia impedes this process is the same as saying “jump off a cliff”. And lastly, right now the US and Russia are trying to reach an agreement about how to deescalate in Ukraine and how to ensure both countries’ interests in Syria. Both cases will involve a compromise, and both cases will result in a division into spheres of influence. This doesn’t mean a territorial division, but an agreement (which won’t necessarily be documented) based on how the US and Russia can co-exist taking into account the US’ subversion and Russia’s new and improved leverage. The equilibrium will be reset to the pre-Arab spring scenario.
And concerning Israel: time is ticking for Netanyahu & Co. The Palestinian people will receive “justice” (in a way that correlates with the modern reality of international law), although it won’t mean the deletion of Israel. Emotionally speaking, the two-State solution is an injustice, but logically/pragmatically/realistically speaking – it is the only way out of this impasse. And it should also be taken into account that the regime in Tel Aviv isn’t forever. Things can change in this regard and a multi-vector path can open up. After all, the Chinese Silk Road is just to irresistible to ignore.
To end with – here is some good news:
“Indian media reported earlier that the country’s defense ministry expects an approval from the Governmental Committee on Security to buy five S-400 complexes from Russia for a total of around $5.5 bln”
More about why this is important can be read here. All eyes are now on the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki. In the meantime, here is what Bashar al-Assad himself said on this topic of “betrayal”:
[At 3:20 in the video]
Q: Russia appears to be making a lot of decisions about Syria, whether about foreign troops withdrawing to deals being struck with Israel over southern Syria, to which weapons you may or may not have. Does Russia now make your decisions?
President Assad: Russia is fighting for the international law, and part of this international law is the sovereignty of different countries, of the sovereign countries, Syria is one of them. Their politics, their behaviors, their values are not about interfere or dictate; they don’t. We’ve had good relations with Russia for more than six decades now, nearly seven decades. They never, during our relation, try to dictate, even if there are differences; because there is a war and because there’s high dynamism now in the region, it’s natural to have differences between the different parties, whether within our government or other governments; Russia-Syria, Syria-Iran, Iran-Russia, and within these governments, that’s very natural, but at the end the only decision about what’s going on in Syria and what’s going to happen, it’s a Syrian decision. No one should have any doubt about this, regardless of the statements that you may hear, because I know on which base the question is.
Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.