Russia has defiantly refused to back the West’s hard line on Syria not just because it retains interests there but also as Moscow wants to send a message it is still a great power, analysts said.
Russia last month used its U.N. Security Council veto to shoot down a resolution condemning the lethal crackdown by President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and has made clear it will not contemplate sanctions against Damascus.
In recent days, Moscow told the West it had failed to condemn violations by the opposition in the unrest and became the first major power to liken the unrest in the country to a civil war.
Russia last month used its U.N. Security Council veto to shoot down a resolution condemning the lethal crackdown by President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and has made clear it will not contemplate sanctions against Damascus.
In recent days, Moscow told the West it had failed to condemn violations by the opposition in the unrest and became the first major power to liken the unrest in the country to a civil war.
With Russia also slamming new Western sanctions against Iran over its nuclear drive and opposing U.N. Security Council action, Russia’s stance is increasingly reminiscent of the hardball heyday of postwar Soviet diplomacy.
The Soviet Union’s long-serving foreign minister Andrei Gromyko, who held the post for 28 years from 1957 to 1985, then won the grudgingly respectful nickname of Mr Nyet (Mr No) from the West for his cussed intransigence.
The spirit of Gromyko, who died in 1989, still haunts the Russian foreign ministry and his 100th birthday was celebrated with full ceremony in its Stalin-era skyscraper in 2009.
“Russia inherited foreign policy and a foreign policy establishment from the USSR and in many ways continues the tradition of Stalin and Brezhnev times,” said Yevgeny Volk of the Yeltsin Foundation.
He said that Russia as the successor state to the Soviet Union still feels a loyalty to former Soviet allies regarded with distaste elsewhere -- including Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Syria.
Under strongman leader Vladimir Putin, modern Russia has always wanted to show it remains a “velikaya derzhava” -- a great power -- despite the humiliating loss of the Soviet Empire two decades ago.
The tensions with the West over Syria and Iran also come at a time when the elite wants to flex its muscle ahead of parliamentary elections in December and presidential polls in March, when Putin is expected to return to the Kremlin.
“Russia is not going to drop its allies, especially before an election at a time when nationalist sentiment is growing. It would be seen as surrender on the part of Russia,” said Volk.
Moscow’s stubborn stance contrasts with how in March it opened the way for the Western air campaign in Libya by declining to use its veto and instead abstaining on the vote to create a no-fly zone.
That decision was championed by President Dmitry Medvedev, who made much of his strong personal relationship with his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama but is now standing aside for the more prickly Putin.
“The West wants Russia’s support, but what will Moscow get in return?” said Viktor Kremenyuk, the deputy head of the United States-Canada Institute at the Russian Academy of Sciences.
“Russia received nothing for its support on Libya.”
The Soviet Union built strong relations with Assad’s father, the late Syrian president Hafez al-Assad, the kind of authoritarian but strongly secular Arab leader of whom the Soviet Union approved.
As a result, Russia remains a leading arms supplier to Syria and also has an occasionally-used but potentially strategic naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus which admirals have vowed to expand in the next years.
Kremenyuk said: “Syria has been loyal and this is appreciated. Moscow does not have so many allies in the world that they can just be easily cast aside.”
Vyacheslav Dzirkaln, deputy director of Russia’s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, bluntly stated earlier this month that Moscow would honor all previous military contracts to Damascus.
“Since there are no restrictions on arms supplies to Syria, Russia is performing all of its contractual obligations we have assumed before this country,” he said, quoted by the Interfax news agency.
These are believed to include Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles, a sale that has caused repeated alarm from Syria's foe Israel.
“Russia has invested a lot in Syria and does not want to lose its position,” commented Volk. But he warned that if Russia defended Assad “too stubbornly” it risked completely losing all influence in the country if he was toppled.
The ousting of the Libyan regime of Muammar Qaddafi by rebels that Russia never fully backed -- even as the regime’s end become inevitable -- left it struggling to regain political influence and an economic foothold in the country.
The Soviet Union’s long-serving foreign minister Andrei Gromyko, who held the post for 28 years from 1957 to 1985, then won the grudgingly respectful nickname of Mr Nyet (Mr No) from the West for his cussed intransigence.
The spirit of Gromyko, who died in 1989, still haunts the Russian foreign ministry and his 100th birthday was celebrated with full ceremony in its Stalin-era skyscraper in 2009.
“Russia inherited foreign policy and a foreign policy establishment from the USSR and in many ways continues the tradition of Stalin and Brezhnev times,” said Yevgeny Volk of the Yeltsin Foundation.
He said that Russia as the successor state to the Soviet Union still feels a loyalty to former Soviet allies regarded with distaste elsewhere -- including Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Syria.
Under strongman leader Vladimir Putin, modern Russia has always wanted to show it remains a “velikaya derzhava” -- a great power -- despite the humiliating loss of the Soviet Empire two decades ago.
The tensions with the West over Syria and Iran also come at a time when the elite wants to flex its muscle ahead of parliamentary elections in December and presidential polls in March, when Putin is expected to return to the Kremlin.
“Russia is not going to drop its allies, especially before an election at a time when nationalist sentiment is growing. It would be seen as surrender on the part of Russia,” said Volk.
Moscow’s stubborn stance contrasts with how in March it opened the way for the Western air campaign in Libya by declining to use its veto and instead abstaining on the vote to create a no-fly zone.
That decision was championed by President Dmitry Medvedev, who made much of his strong personal relationship with his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama but is now standing aside for the more prickly Putin.
“The West wants Russia’s support, but what will Moscow get in return?” said Viktor Kremenyuk, the deputy head of the United States-Canada Institute at the Russian Academy of Sciences.
“Russia received nothing for its support on Libya.”
The Soviet Union built strong relations with Assad’s father, the late Syrian president Hafez al-Assad, the kind of authoritarian but strongly secular Arab leader of whom the Soviet Union approved.
As a result, Russia remains a leading arms supplier to Syria and also has an occasionally-used but potentially strategic naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus which admirals have vowed to expand in the next years.
Kremenyuk said: “Syria has been loyal and this is appreciated. Moscow does not have so many allies in the world that they can just be easily cast aside.”
Vyacheslav Dzirkaln, deputy director of Russia’s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, bluntly stated earlier this month that Moscow would honor all previous military contracts to Damascus.
“Since there are no restrictions on arms supplies to Syria, Russia is performing all of its contractual obligations we have assumed before this country,” he said, quoted by the Interfax news agency.
These are believed to include Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles, a sale that has caused repeated alarm from Syria's foe Israel.
“Russia has invested a lot in Syria and does not want to lose its position,” commented Volk. But he warned that if Russia defended Assad “too stubbornly” it risked completely losing all influence in the country if he was toppled.
The ousting of the Libyan regime of Muammar Qaddafi by rebels that Russia never fully backed -- even as the regime’s end become inevitable -- left it struggling to regain political influence and an economic foothold in the country.
Tuesday, 22 November 2011 - http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/11/22/178552.html
Energy Sources
Thanks to the eyes of a friend from Canada who reminded me to check DEBKA more regularly, it appears that Putin has got his sights set on some of the energy stores recently discovered in Israel. Over the past year, “reserves of 25 trillion cubic feet would more than cover Israel’s energy needs and enable it to become a gas exporter, revolutionizing an economy which has developed despite a paucity of natural resources.” [1]
Isn’t that swell? It gets even more interesting, too. Beirut has claimed that Israel has been “looting” Lebanese gas sources. What is even more interesting is that apparently, Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, though put off by “Cypriot President Dimitris Christofias for help in mapping the borders of oil and gas fields in the Mediterranean,” Putin wasted no time inviting Hariri to Moscow to help support his (Hariri’s) cause.
Apparently, Hariri has been between a rock and a hard place trying to save his government from falling into the hands of the Hezbollah. Both Putin and Medvedev rolled out the red carpet for him. Why? Because Putin wanted something. What does he want?
According to DEBKA, “Moscow could help Lebanon place itself on the map of oil and gas fields and pipelines in the eastern Mediterranean. But to exploit its oil and gas wealth under the sea, Lebanon needed Russia as energy partner and provider of funds, equipment and skilled labor.
“Russia would reciprocate with heavy investments in the Lebanese economy that would restore Beirut to its former prestige as financial capital of the Middle East and an assured supply of advanced weapons at token prices to secure those investments.”
Does this sound like anything to you? I don’t know – maybe I’m spit-balling here – but this certainly sounds the potential Northern Invasion in the making. I hate it as much as the next person when we attempt to determine prophetic nuances from the news, but here is a case where Putin is obviously up to something. He wants to partner with Lebanon for their energy sources.
It appears that Putin wants to play hardball and he is doing it by promising Hariri a number of things:
“The Lebanese prime minister left Moscow with an understanding in his pocket on three points. As a mark of Russian goodwill, he was promised the gift of six MI 24 helicopters 31 T-72 tanks, 36 130 mm cannons complete with half a million shells and thirty thousand artillery shells – an unprecedented donation to a country outside Moscow’s sphere of influence.
Their understanding extended to three key areas:
Their understanding extended to three key areas:
- They would discuss big Russian firms building a number of gas-powered electricity plants in Lebanon, backed by Kremlin guarantees and financing – against a Lebanese guarantee to purchase their output over a 30-year period.
- The Russian-built Arab Gas Pipeline Project Phase II, designed to bring gas from Egypt and run through Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Turkey, would grow a Lebanese branch. On Dec. 5, a Kremlin official said: “We want to study a possibility of gas shipment from Syria to Lebanon, for example, by using the Arab Gas Pipeline capacity.”
- Moscow offered to build three nuclear power plants in Turkey.
The second understanding was the real reason for Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s visit to Beirut Wednesday, Nov. 24 and his talks with Hariri. Erdogan now has a new interest in defusing the tensions in Lebanon and keeping Hariri in power.”
We know that both Lebanon and Syria are north of Israel. Putin has a Russian Naval Base currently being constructed in Tartous, Syria. As DEBKA points out, “As headquarters of the Russian Black Sea and Mediterranean fleets, this base will also guard Moscow’s investments and holdings in gas and oil fields in the Mediterranean.”
It certainly appears that Putin has his eye on the prize of energy reserves in Lebanon. Since he is so anxious to get his fingers into those reserves, it will bring him that much closer to Israel, where oil has been discovered as well.
In Ezekiel 38-39, what is interesting is that whoever Gog is, he decides to invade Israel for spoils. As Fruchtenbaum points out, the use of the word “spoils” is simply a term used throughout the Old Testament and can mean a great deal of things. There is nothing specific in the use of that word. It normally means whatever the invading army takes with them after the invasion and conquering.
In the case of Putin and Israel, we now know beyond doubt that Israel has vast amounts of oil underneath their land. Within two years, they estimate that once they are in full production, Israel will become self-sufficient, needing no fuel or other energy sources from anyone.
Is that enough to make Putin (or any other individual) hungry for what Israel has? Considering the fact that while Russia has extensive energy stores, much of it is simply undeveloped, in spite of the fact that it has the largest natural gas reserve in the world. However, this is changing because of its own internal energy policy stretching up to the year 2020.
Russia wants to increase its renewable energy sources, dipping into what it already has and increasing the use of its share of natural resources. Russia has large reserves of natural gas, oil, coal, and even uranium. Since this is the case, one can only wonder why Russia would need to look elsewhere.
The reality is that the nation that controls the world’s energy supply, controls the world. It is simple economics. In this way, that controlling nation would not even need to conquer other nations through military might, but simply by controlling how the world obtains its fuels.
We know that with respect to OPEC, they determine the price of oil, which translates to how much we pay at the gas pump. The more a country or group controls energy resources, the more they are able to get what they want without having to tap their military to do so. At the same time, a strong military would be necessary to protect that country’s (or group’s) resources.
Russia has all of this. They have a fairly strong military and the upcoming naval base at Tartous, Syria will only put them in a greater position to defend what they have. If they gain a foothold into Lebanon, with their military base so close, they will be able to defend Lebanon from any attempts by the Hezbollah or anyone else from swooping into attempt a coup or takeover.
Being so close to Lebanon also puts them within a stone’s throw of Israel. Will it be that far for Putin if he ever decides he wants to move into Israel and take what they have to add to his stores? Who will stop Putin? While some countries may object verbally, I cannot imagine the U.N. or anyone else stepping up to defend Israel (with the possibility of Canada and by the time they got there, it would be well over), if Putin (or anyone) opts to invade Israel.
What is so fascinating to me is that though Israel is such a small country, surrounded by fascism, communism, and the like, since 1948, they have maintained their statehood. They have not fallen under any attempt to destroy them.
We also know from Ezekiel 38-39 that the particular attempted invasion described here will be just that – an attempted invasion – with God not only pulling the strings on Gog, but utterly destroying him, his armies, and ultimately his land.
Can we be sure that Putin is this Gog that Ezekiel speaks of here? No, we cannot. The most we should do is move ahead slowly, cautiously, as the final times play themselves out, all according to God’s timetable.
Of course, if the pieces are starting to fall into place that will eventually turn into the Northern Invasion spoken of by Ezekiel, it means that we are much closer to the end than we may realize. Time will tell. In the meantime, we must be about our Father’s business. We cannot be sidetracked thinking that the “end is near.”
While it is fine to watch for these things, it must always be done while we continue to work. Souls are yet to be saved. God is counting on us to introduce those souls to Him in order that He might turn their eyes to Him, open those same eyes, and open their hearts to the truth of who Jesus Christ is and what He has accomplished for we sinners of this world!
Creating a defensive 'island' in Syria against ISIS
Click to enlarge the cartoon. Drawing by Tatiana Perelygina
When protests erupted in Syria in 2011 against the authoritarian rule of a religious minority led by President Bashar al-Assad, opinions about what awaited the country were divided.
Commentators in the West, Turkey and the Gulf expected an imminent collapse of the regime in Damascus along either Tunisian or Libyan lines - internal revolt or via outside interference. Observers in Russia pointed out that the Syrian case was different from the others: a religiously mixed population, an effective army, a unified ruling class, and powerful support from Iran spelled a different trajectory.
Events that followed showed that Moscow had a better understanding of Syria’s nuances. The position adopted by Russia (unwavering support for official Damascus and opposition to any outside interference) turned out if not advantageous, then at least the most consistent.
Between 2011 and 2015, the situation in the country, of course, deteriorated but still ran counter to the forecasts of an inevitable revolutionary upheaval. Developments took many twists and turns, including coming close to a US war against Syria, a surprisingly smooth operation to remove and destroy chemical weapons, and endless attempts to unite the opposition and find a common platform between Assad’s opponents and supporters.
The ISIS effect
All of that is now in the past. The explosive emergence of Islamic State (ISIS) has utterly changed the rules. The old Syria no longer exists and it still remains to be seen whether it will be preserved at all in any shape or form.
Indirect evidence that Moscow has stepped up its military assistance to Damascus allows one to conclude that Russia has decided to take a far more active part in the crisis. The situation on the ground is confusing: all the actors are involved in multi-faceted conflicts. Assad’s forces are opposed to ISIS and what is traditionally described as the moderate opposition. ISIS is fighting Assad and the opposition. The opposition sees everyone else as enemies. None of this takes into account the Kurds, who are waging a war of their own against Turkey, which under the guise of fighting ISIS is trying to resolve the Kurdish issue.
Hopeless divisions
To expect this fractured mess to offer hopes of a Syrian settlement is utterly unrealistic - particularly since the international community is hopelessly divided on options for resolving the crisis.
In Syria, as in the Middle East as a whole, there can now be no “victory”. Russian diplomats always insisted that this was not about Assad but about the principle - "hands off, do no harm" - and that the main objective was to protect the status quo. This policy has not worked: there is no longer any status quo in Syria.
The Western view is that because of that procrastination, the door has been opened to ISIS, which ironically now represents the only effective force opposing Assad. The Russian view is that Western stubbornness has undermined the chances of a soft transformation of the Syrian authorities. In any event, the question now is whether it will be possible to prevent ISIS from entering Damascus, which would have a most powerful propaganda effect.
Damascus is one of the cultural and historical capitals of the Arab world, part of European civilization's heritage. Its surrender would symbolize an irreversible retreat of modernity from the Middle East. Tens and now hundreds of thousands of refugees from the region that have flooded Europe have realized this: where the future is painted in ISIS colors, there is no place for modern and forward-looking people.
'Alawite Israel'
In what case could Russian efforts be considered a success? Realistically speaking, only if a de-facto equivalent of an “Alawite Israel” is created, an enclave that – with outside support – would be capable of self-defense and that would serve as an obstacle to an uncontrolled spread of ISIS. The comparison is, of course, a very loose one but the mechanism is similar.
Numerous diplomatic contacts that took place in the summer, when Moscow received a string of visitors from the Middle East, lead one to conclude that the current busy activity on Russia’s part should come as no surprise. Moscow’s readiness to undertake risks for the sake of preserving an “Alawite Israel” is in the interests of everybody except ISIS.
Still, Western leaders voice dissatisfaction and concern at an increased Russian military presence in Syria, while calling for a decisive intervention in order to defeat ISIS, as British prime minster, David Cameron did recently.
If one believed that Islamic State could be defeated and that after it there would start yet another struggle for control over Syria, then Western concerns would be justified: they really would not want Russia to have a claim for a serious role in a future Syria. However, a far more realistic scenario is that ISIS will not be defeated by the international coalition and that Syria will not be resurrected on new foundations but that the Islamists’ opponents will create a stronghold in limited territories and will continue to fight for their survival.
In that case, it would make sense for the West not to hinder Russia’s actions but to assist them, if possible. However, the whole of the Middle East’s recent history and the attitude outside forces have to the region suggest the West has all but lost the ability to analyze what is happening without investing it with ideological bias and personal feelings.
The author is the editor in chief of Russia in Global Affairs and chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, a non-governmental think tank.
September 17, 2015
http://rbth.co.uk/opinion/2015/09/17/creating_a_defensive_island_in_syria_against_isis_49347.html
http://rbth.co.uk/opinion/2015/09/17/creating_a_defensive_island_in_syria_against_isis_49347.html
The coming partition in Syria
Notwithstanding the self-created confusion in the United States and most other western countries over which Syrian revolutionary groups to support, and in light of the latest Turkish decision to fight Daesh (the self-proclaimed) Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) extremists and Kurdish militants simultaneously, Syria is bound to implode.
This tragedy can be avoided if Syrians work out their differences, perhaps through a Second National Congress as suggested by leading Arab nationalists, though the hurdle that is preventing a resolution is the Baath regime itself. Nearly five years into a bloody war with no end in sight, can anyone prevent this implosion and avoid the beginning of prolonged conflicts among nascent statelets that will inevitably rise across Syria?
In a remarkably frank presentation on July 26, the Syrian President Bashar Al Assad acknowledged immense pressures on his increasingly fragile military, claiming that it is widely overstretched and exhausted. Consequently, and for tactical reasons, there was little choice but to retreat from certain areas. Long gone was the 2011 bravura that anticipated victories galore. Today, the Syrian Arab Army is engaged in a war of attrition that has sapped its manpower, which was why Al Assad amnestied deserters in the hope that some might return and launched a new campaign that urged citizens to enlist.
A satrapy of Iran and Hezbollah
Short of fighting men willing to die for a lost cause, few volunteered and even fewer believed that their leaders, especially civilian party officials, could usher in a victory of the brave. Simply stated, the mighty Syrian Arab Army was but a satrapy of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hezbollah, which meant that without them, most of the territories that linked Damascus to Latakia would have fallen some time ago. That might still be the case, although by the president’s own avowal, few of his own troops were willing to stick around to find out. This was not a felicitous development for the Syrian regime as it contended with overwhelming offensives that cornered it into indiscriminate aerial campaigns against its own nationals. Pretending that such brilliant tactical manoeuvres were the only ways to defeat rebel elements was a clever misnomer since killing one’s own people was a solid sign of abject failure. Moreover, by informing everyone that his forces regrouped in strongholds to the west so that the regime could better defend said localities, Damascus signalled that it was carefully paving the way for partition.
To be sure, the government controls key cities, including Hama, Homs, Damascus and Latakia, although the first two lie in ruin. It is also fair to say that the regime held strategic military bases, even if one wondered what was the point of holding on to the airport in Deir Al Zor, the T4 base in eastern Homs and the Thaalah base in the south, near Daraa. The regime lost almost all of Idlib province in the north, the strategic city of Jisr Al Shughur, and was increasingly under pressure to service Aleppo, which is now in a precarious situation.
What happens in Aleppo will eventually determine Syria’s fate, although the brutal aerial campaign against rebel positions there does not bode well, especially now that Turkey has decided to join in the fighting. Of course, Ankara threw in the proverbial towel because it evaluated the rise of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD), an ally of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), with alarm and feared a spillover inside Turkey itself. This preventive measure is complicated and unclear on several levels but time will tell whether Ankara will mobilize Nato forces, Russia, Iran and others, although no one should rejoice at an expansion of the war that will further add to Syria’s misery. In fact, and while there are those who foresee a government victory, in reality, the regime is caught in a downward spiral with both Aleppo and Daraa likely to fall before too long. Likewise, rebel forces will now be beholden too, which may well muddle things to those who enjoyed freedom of action until now.
Naturally, and even if its back was against the wall, the Al Assad regime was determined to fight for Aleppo and Daraa because their loss would further delegitimise the state. Indeed, a de facto partition of the country is guaranteed when either or both of these cities fall. Clearly, such an outcome would effectively mean that the regime is restricted to a strip of territory in the west, stretching from Damascus through Homs, Hama and Latakia, and the Al Qalamun mountain range along the Lebanese border that is defended by Hezbollah. A few days ago, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying that his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, was having a change of heart on the Kremlin’s wholehearted support for Al Assad. Putin may eventually give up on Al Assad although what is uncertain was whether Ankara forced Moscow’s hand, either to accept the country’s partition (presumably to protect Turkey from Kurds), or preserve Syria’s unity under a different system of rule.
http://gulfnews.com/opinion/thinkers/the-coming-partition-in-syria-1.1561900
Russia Expands Military Presence in Syria, Satellite Photos Show
Satellite images from IHS Jane’s, a defense-intelligence provider, that it says show Russian military expansion in Syria. AIRBUS/IHS JANE’S INTELLIGENCE REVIEW
WASHINGTON—Russian forces appear to be expanding their military presence in Syria through the development of two additional bases that pose new challenges for the Obama administration as it struggles to avert a clash with Moscow in the Middle East.
Private satellite images released Tuesday revealed new construction at two Syrian military facilities near the Mediterranean coast, the latest sign Russia is preparing to inject its military forces into the country’s 4½-year war.
While U.S. military officials assessed the importance of the projects and overall buildup, the Obama administration is seeking to transform the potential showdown into a fresh diplomatic initiative to push Syrian President Bashar al-Assad—Russia’s longtime ally—from power, senior administration officials said.
Specifically, officials are exploring whether the U.S. could work with Moscow to ease Mr. Assad from power and pave the way for a successor from his Alawite sect, preventing a collapse of the government and a likely takeover by Islamic extremists, a senior administration official said Tuesday.
President Barack Obama plans to push the idea during a series of meetings next week during the United Nations General Assembly in New York. “We have to learn more about Russia’s intentions before we know how viable it is,” said one senior administration official.
Russian forces appear to be expanding their military presence in Syria through the development of two additional bases, according to new satellite imagery viewed by the Journal. Why could this be significant? WSJ’s Jason Bellini has #TheShortAnswer.
If Russian President Vladimir Putin wants to flex Russia’s military toprotect Mr. Assad, relations with Moscow might deteriorate, as they did when Russia seized Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula last year.
But if Russia is instead trying to maintain its existing influence, even if Mr. Assad is ousted, the White House sees a potential diplomatic opening.
As part of the resolution, Russia and Iran would get to protect their interests in Syria, and Moscow would contribute to the U.S.-led fight against Islamic State militants, the official said.
The Obama administration’s maneuvering is being driven largely by Russia’s moves to build up its military position, which until recently was largely focused on an air base south of the Syrian port city of Latakia.
Moscow has dispatched more than two dozen combat aircraft to the airfield, where Russian surveillance drones have started flying, according to U.S. defense officials. Russia has also sent tanks, air-defense systems, armored-personnel carriers and enough housing for 2,000 people, officials have said.
Now, satellite images provided by IHS Jane’s, a defense-intelligence provider, show what appears to be an additional, previously undisclosed, Russian military expansion.
The images from mid-September show development of a weapons depot and military facility north of Latakia, suggesting that Russia is preparing to place troops in both places, according to Robert Munks,editor of IHS Jane’s Intelligence Review.
While Russia’s recent activity in Syria has raised concern within the administration, U.S. officials are trying not to inflame tensions as they try to determine the scope for diplomacy.
Mr. Putin is also attending the U.N. General Assembly and the
Civilians clambered on a site hit by what activists said was an explosive dropped by Assad regime forces in Saraqib on Tuesday. PHOTO: KHALIL ASHAWI/REUTERS
White House is still weighing whether Mr. Obama meets with him.
The Syrian war has left 250,000 people dead, created a security vacuum filled by Islamic State militants, and sparked a refugee crisis creating strains across the Middle East and Europe, with more than four million people displaced.
Pentagon officials said they weren’t certain if development of the two bases seen in the satellite images was related to Russia’s military presence at the airfield.
“There is clearly capability beyond just force protection that is on the ground there,” said one senior military official. “But the questions remain: What are they going do with it? Where are they going to do it? Who are they going to do it with? And who are they going to do it against?”
U.S. officials are trying to avoid a complete collapse of the regime infrastructure, which they say would be too destabilizing and create an environment where extremist groups would fill the void as happened after the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Mr. Obama believes “a Russian decision to double down on Assad’s leadership is a losing bet.” Mr. Earnest said Russia’s intentions within Syria remain unclear.
“But we continue to be interested in Russia sending a signal about their willingness to constructively support the international coalition to degrade and ultimately destroy” Islamic State, he said.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-expands-military-its-presence-in-syria-satellite-photos-show-1442937150
http://www.canarymission.org/
At a meeting in Moscow in July, a top Iranian general unfurled a map of Syria to explain to his Russian hosts how a series of defeats for President Bashar al-Assad could be turned into victory - with Russia's help.
Major General Qassem Soleimani's visit to Moscow was the first step in planning for a Russian military intervention that has reshaped the Syrian war and forged a new Iranian-Russian alliance in support of Assad.
As Russian warplanes bomb rebels from above, the arrival of Iranian special forces for ground operations underscores several months of planning between Assad's two most important allies, driven by panic at rapid insurgent gains.
Soleimani is the commander of the Quds Force, the elite extra-territorial special forces arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, and reports directly to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Senior regional sources say he has already been overseeing ground operations against insurgents in Syria and is now at the heart of planning for the new Russian- and Iranian-backed offensive.
That expands his regional role as the battlefield commander who has also steered the fight in neighboring Iraq by Iranian-backed Shi'ite militia against Islamic State.
His Moscow meeting outlined the deteriorating situation in Syria, where rebel advances toward the coast were posing a danger to the heartland of Assad's Alawite sect, where Russia maintains its only Mediterranean naval base in Tartous.
"Soleimani put the map of Syria on the table. The Russians were very alarmed, and felt matters were in steep decline and that there were real dangers to the regime. The Iranians assured them there is still the possibility to reclaim the initiative," a senior regional official said. "At that time, Soleimani played a role in assuring them that we haven't lost all the cards."
Three senior officials in the region say Soleimani's July trip was preceded by high-level Russian-Iranian contacts that produced political agreement on the need to pump in new support for Assad as his losses accelerated.
Their accounts suggest planning for the intervention began to germinate several months earlier. It means Tehran and Moscow had been discussing ways to prop up Assad by force even as Western officials were describing what they believed was new flexibility in Moscow's stance on his future.
Before the latest moves, Iran had aided Assad militarily by mobilizing Shi'ite militias to fight alongside the Syrian army, and dispatching Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps officers as advisors. A number of them have been killed.
Russia, an ally of Damascus since the Cold War, had supplied weapons to the Syrian army and shielded Damascus diplomatically from Western attempts to sanction Assad at the United Nations.
Their support did not prevent rebels - some of them backed by Assad's regional foes - from reducing Assad's control of Syria to around one fifth of its territory in a four-year-long war estimated to have killed 250,000 people.
The decision for a joint Iranian-Russian military effort in Syria was taken at a meeting between Russia's foreign minister and Khamenei a few months ago, said a senior official of a country in the region, involved in security matters.
"Soleimani, assigned by Khamenei to run the Iranian side of the operation, traveled to Moscow to discuss details. And he also traveled to Syria several times since then," the official said.
The Russian government says its Syria deployment came as the result of a formal request from Assad, who himself laid out the problems facing the Syrian military in stark terms in July, saying it faced a manpower problem.
Khamenei also sent a senior envoy to Moscow to meet President Vladimir Putin, another senior regional official said. "Putin told him 'Okay we will intervene. Send Qassem Soleimani'. He went to explain the map of the theater."
RESIDENT IN DAMASCUS
Russian warplanes, deployed at an airfield in Latakia, began mounting air strikes against rebels in Syria last week.
Moscow says it is targeting Islamic State, but many of Russia's air strikes have hit other insurgents, including groups backed by Assad's foreign enemies, notably in the northwest where rebels seized strategically important towns including Jisr al-Shughour earlier this year.
In the biggest deployment of Iranian forces yet, sources told Reuters last week that hundreds of troops have arrived since late September to take part in a major ground offensive planned in the west and northwest.
Around 3,000 fighters from the Iranian-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah have also mobilized for the battle, along with Syrian army troops, said one of the senior regional sources.
The military intervention in Syria is set out in an agreement between Moscow and Tehran that says Russian air strikes will support ground operations by Iranian, Syrian and Lebanese Hezbollah forces, said one of the senior regional sources.
The agreement also included the provision of more sophisticated Russian weapons to the Syrian army, and the establishment of joint operations rooms that would bring those allies together, along with the government of Iraq, which is allied both to Iran and the United States.
One of the operations rooms is in Damascus and another is in Baghdad.
"Soleimani is almost resident in Damascus, or let's say he goes there a lot and you can find him between meetings with President Assad and visits to the theater of operations like any other soldier," said one of the senior regional officials.
Syria's foreign minister said on Monday that the Russian air strikes had been planned for months.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/06/us-mideast-crisis-syria-soleimani-insigh-idUSKCN0S02BV20151006
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה