When does diplomacy become dangerous? The answer: when it is not sincere. Now that may sound a tad naïve, but give me a moment of your time to explain. The purpose of diplomacy is to allow nations to settle differences through talk rather than war. It can work, and it can fail miserably. The most often cited case of diplomacy failing is the now infamous peace plan brokered by British Prime Minister Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler just prior to the outbreak of World War Two, and Chamberlain's famous words "Peace in our time". More often than not diplomacy solves small issues between nations, while the more serious, or strategic issues generally have ended in military action.
In todays world we have all kinds of "diplomacy" happening every day, and all day long, but we also have wars raging during the same period. In fact, diplomacy has been reduced to acts of one-up-man-ship for some theoretical "moral high ground" rather than its intended purpose of resolving disputes. The peril that results from this kind of behaviour leaves mankind with no real dispute mechanism other than war, or the "Law of the Jungle" - might is right and the end justifies the means.
Just recently I had the unfortunate privilege of watching the Israeli military Chief of Staff give a brief interview regarding a possible Kurdish state being formed from the countries of Turkey, Syria, and Iraq. Although that push to create a Kurdish state from these countries is not news, his particular delight in the idea, and his "too cute for words" pronouncement that Israel wouldn't be opposed to such a development, as he smiled into the camera, was in a word shocking. It wasn't shocking because he believed in the idea, but rather it was shocking because he showed no respect for the territorial integrity of the three nations already at war for their survival. In other words, while Israel sits somewhat quietly on the sides of these conflicts, feigning if you will diplomacy, in reality Israel isn't uninvolved or sincere.
Similarly, while the United States sits at one UN Security Council meeting after another, in many cases over Syria, and attempts to diplomatically pressure the Syrian government and its allies, one of its senior Generals recently pronounced that the Syrian army and its allies would not be permitted to cross the Euphrates River to enter Eastern Syria. Take a moment and consider that General's pronouncement. The Syrian army would not be permitted to enter the eastern half of its own country... Where in the rules of international law could this statement be rooted? The idea that a sovereign power cannot exercise sovereignty over its own territory is an affront to the very foundation of nationhood. An exception to this rule can me made in cases of genocide, such as Rwanda, but that is clearly not the case in Syria.
In fact, with the establishment of at least two US airbases in eastern Syria, and according to the Turkish government at least ten US bases of all types in the same area, it is clear that the American government is occupying eastern Syria in order to reinforce the Kurdish annexation of that area in order to establish a Kurdish state. The impending independence vote of the Iraqi Kurds in northern Iraq, an area also heavily aligned with the US government, reinforces the notion. Yet, and here comes the dangerous diplomacy, the Americans continue to posture internationally that they want a peaceful settlement of the Syrian civil war.
The question then becomes, obviously, how sincere are the US diplomatic pronouncements about peace in Syria? The answer quite clearly is they are not serious what-so-ever. That leads to a greater problem: if the US is not serious about its diplomacy in Syria, then is it serious in its diplomacy toward Iran, North Korea, or even Russia and China? Should these countries take American diplomacy seriously at all, or should they rely on military means to resolve their inevitable national clashes of interests? Therein lies the danger of diplomacy without sincerity, and diplomacy that ignores its fundamental foundation which is international law. How nations must act toward other nations.
Real diplomacy has resolved some of the world's most anxious moments. The Cuban missile crisis comes to mind. There was also the fall of the Berlin Wall. These were crisis that, once resolved by diplomacy, gave nations a chance to move forward without the direct use of force. Yes, they had their origins in force, but sincerity and adherence to international law overcame the threat of war, because the nations involved sincerely did not want such a confrontation. That is missing today. On a daily basis we here one side or the other threatening nuclear war, or "limited" nuclear strikes as doable. The aim is not to restore international law, or for that matter international order. The goal quite clearly appears to be the reverse - "strategic interests or national interests" trump (pardon the pun) the law of nations. The same type of scenario the world witnessed just before World War Two and the "peace in our time" declaration. It was not "appeasement" that didn't work in 1939, but the sincerity behind the "appeasement". The exact same conditions exist today. So, yes, dangerous diplomacy is alive and well, and ruling the hearts of men and women who lead their nations, but conveniently toss the lessons of history to the side - at all our peril.
Showing posts with label Turkey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Turkey. Show all posts
Saturday, September 16, 2017
Sunday, March 12, 2017
Syria is for Syrians
You could be excused for thinking the world has taken a madness pill, and jumped off the deep end. Whether it is the schizophrenic American political scene, the deep and divisive European internal political battles, the Middle East in turmoil, or the fact that the stock markets continue on as if nothing is happening, the place has lost the plot. Speaking of lost the plot, this post focuses on the almost unbelievable actions of foreign nations in Syria, and what may well come next.
Let's start with the rules. The Laws of Wars encompassed within the Convention of the Hague, 1907, specifically defines how a war amongst nations must be declared:
"Article 1
The Contracting Powers recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of reasoned declaration of war or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war."
The United States and Turkey signed this Convention. Ironically, Syria did not. Now Syria is the victim of hostilities perpetuated upon it by two countries who have solemnly sworn not to do so. All the rest flows from this. When the Syrian "uprising" began it was people on the streets - unarmed people. They didn't have small arms, artillery, tanks, or anti-aircraft weapons. Where did all that come from? They didn't have bank accounts with hundreds of millions of dollars to fund a 4 year long conventional war against their own government. Where did that come from? It came from the United States, Turkey and Saudi Arabia - that's where.
Having abandoned the very basic convention of declaring a war on Syria, there was no reason to believe that the rest of the war would be any different. No rules. No holds barred. The law of the jungle where might is right seeped into the country of Syria. Hundreds of thousands have been slaughtered in the name of ... regime change. That's really what it boils down to. The Russians and Iranians want to keep a strategic ally in the region, and the Americans, Turks and Saudis want them gone. Let's not disgrace the name of democracy and liberty by suggesting the war in Syria has a thing to do with those tenants of freedom.
So where are we going from here in Syria? The map below will tell you where we are now:
As you can see, the blue area in the top to middle part of this picture is the area of Northern Syria controlled by Turkey after it invaded with armed militia supporters. The yellow areas are controlled by essentially the Kurds (backed with armed Americans). The green areas are controlled by the Syrian, Russian, and Iranian forces. Several things come to mind. Firstly, the Kurds are quite divided in the territories they hold. To the west they hold large parts of northern Aleppo. To the east they hold the areas around Manbij. In between them the Turks hold the area around Al-Bab. What makes things tricky for the Kurds is they cannot unite their territories in the east and west without engaging Turkish forces, which would give Turkish President Erdogan the excuse he needs to go full in with large military forces. So, realistically, the Kurds have no hope of holding the area of Northern Aleppo.
They also have no realistic hope of holding their territories on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River centered on Manbij. As I write this, Syrian and Russian forces are making big advances shown as pink on the map. (see operational map below) They are pushing to and reaching the Euphrates River to the southern flank of the Kurds Manjib beach head. It is now only a matter of time before the Kurds will have to withdraw from the Manbij area to the eastern bank of the Euphrates River. Here their position is far more defensible from the Syrian army, and to a lesser extent the Turkish Army.
That makes the Euphrates River the new dividing line in the battle for Syria - the divide between the Kurds/Americans and everyone else. There is, however, a weak link in that line of defence - Deir al- Zour. This city and nearby airbase is controlled by the Syrian army, and is located to the south of Al- Raqqa (the ISIS self declared capital on the Euphrates. This map gives you a good idea of the area and the cities involved:
Deir al- Zour bridges the Euphrates and leaves any Kurdish partition of North Eastern Syria highly vulnerable. In fact, it makes such a complete partition almost impossible to defend. Currently, the Kurds and Americans are concentrating their forces on the battle to retake Al-Raqqa. They have it surrounded on three sides with its back to the Euphrates. The US has just deployed 2200 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, and 1000 reservists to Kuwait in preparation for the final battle of Al-Raqqa. They have also deployed air mobile artillery, and the 400 troops that go with it, directly to the Al-Raqqa front. As of this morning the Americans and Kurds were within 50 km of the northern gates to Al-Raqqa. It may be a grind, but ISIS has no hope of winning that battle. Al-Raqqa will be laid to waste by American artillery and air strikes.
What comes then? Well, if the American and Kurdish intention is to create a Kurdish territory out of North eastern Syria, which this writer considers a foregone conclusion, then a battle for Dier-al-Zour will be next. It is a strategic must to seal a gaping hole in the Euphrates River defence concept. That will involve the Americans and Kurds attacking the Syrian and Russian military located there. A dangerous proposition indeed.
It has always been the case, since the ISIS advance was halted on the door steps of Bagdad, that the real danger of foreign powers throwing international law to the wind would play itself out once their common menace had been eliminated. We are almost at that point now. Mosul is essentially finished for ISIS. Al-Raqqa is surrounded. It's like the final weeks of Nazi Germany for ISIS right now. What unfolded after Nazi Germany fell was the iron curtain, the Berlin Wall, and the Cold War. Will that happen in Syria? Will the Americans put the brakes on and hold the Kurds to the eastern banks of the Euphrates? Will the Syrians and Russians be prepared to allow that to happen while they turn their attention toward the areas around Damascus and Ibdib that still require action to rid them of Islamic and Turkmen militias? Would that be a fatal move for Syria? And what of Turkey? Would it be prepared to allow a new Kurdish region to be added to the autonomous Kurdish region in Northern Iraq? That would leave just the South Eastern area of Turkey for the Kurds to capture and form their treasured vision of a united Kurdistan - one that already has the implicit and military backing of the United States.
The most plausible scenario, given the pragmatic chess strategy of Russian President Putin, is that the Syrians take the western bank of the Euphrates, and the Kurds/Americans take the Eastern bank - for now. Then the Russians and Syrians will turn their focus to the pockets of resistance in North Western Syria, and isolated pockets around Damascus and their border with Lebanon (Hezbollah and Iran likely playing a predominant role there). It seems Putin is willing to forestall any one-on-one confrontation with the US until after his rearmament program is finished - around 2020. In the mean time he is in the defensive mode, as is clearly demonstrated in the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. The problem with his strategy, as can be quite clearly seen in the Ukraine conflict, is that it gives the Americans time to establish positions in the area, and reinforce/bolster the local military. Now, instead of Russia taking on an isolated Ukrainian military of 50,000 it faces an unofficially NATO aligned country with over 200,000 troops. The same scenario is almost certainly going to play out in the Kurdish territories. In some ways, if you're Putin, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
The real lesson in all of this is that abandoning the rules of order for expediency can never be sanctioned, and that to see it any other way is to invite chaos to the orderly conduct of societies around the world. It has to be said, because it is patently obvious, that the Americans hold the full responsibility for chaos that their cavalier actions have created in the world. They have changed the term "national interest" into the all encompassing "national right". They have claimed the world as their own with no right to do so. An unfortunate, but predictable consequence of the fall of the Soviet Union. A living case of power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely. They have perverted the "peace dividend" that was so greatly lauded when the Berlin Wall fell into a "we'll take what we want when we want dividend", and in doing so turned the world against them. It is the Americans who were not invited into Syria to help fight ISIS. Just as it was the Americans that fanned the flames of the civil unrest in Syria to begin with, and it was the Americans, in conjunction with the Saudis, that financed it.
The only solution for Syria is that Syrians decide what their country will be. To demand otherwise is to place yourself in a type of arrogance not befitting the average person. Always remember it is not righteous people who start wars, it is the self-righteous. The ones that place their beliefs above all others and enforce them over all others. Recent history has shown that the Americans will not allow the Syrians to decide the future of their country, and that is a terrible indictment upon them. It is also a terrible indictment against the rest of us that we allow this type of "God syndrome" to have a place in the civilized world we claim ours to be. In that way, Syria today is a reflection on all of us - our greed, our arrogance, our uncaring hypocrisy. The very same traits that have their roots in all our conflicts of the past. It shows that despite all our achievements as a species, when all that is stripped away, we continue to act as though we still carry clubs and dwell in caves. That's the really sad part of it all.
Let's start with the rules. The Laws of Wars encompassed within the Convention of the Hague, 1907, specifically defines how a war amongst nations must be declared:
"Article 1
The Contracting Powers recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of reasoned declaration of war or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war."
The United States and Turkey signed this Convention. Ironically, Syria did not. Now Syria is the victim of hostilities perpetuated upon it by two countries who have solemnly sworn not to do so. All the rest flows from this. When the Syrian "uprising" began it was people on the streets - unarmed people. They didn't have small arms, artillery, tanks, or anti-aircraft weapons. Where did all that come from? They didn't have bank accounts with hundreds of millions of dollars to fund a 4 year long conventional war against their own government. Where did that come from? It came from the United States, Turkey and Saudi Arabia - that's where.
Having abandoned the very basic convention of declaring a war on Syria, there was no reason to believe that the rest of the war would be any different. No rules. No holds barred. The law of the jungle where might is right seeped into the country of Syria. Hundreds of thousands have been slaughtered in the name of ... regime change. That's really what it boils down to. The Russians and Iranians want to keep a strategic ally in the region, and the Americans, Turks and Saudis want them gone. Let's not disgrace the name of democracy and liberty by suggesting the war in Syria has a thing to do with those tenants of freedom.
So where are we going from here in Syria? The map below will tell you where we are now:
As you can see, the blue area in the top to middle part of this picture is the area of Northern Syria controlled by Turkey after it invaded with armed militia supporters. The yellow areas are controlled by essentially the Kurds (backed with armed Americans). The green areas are controlled by the Syrian, Russian, and Iranian forces. Several things come to mind. Firstly, the Kurds are quite divided in the territories they hold. To the west they hold large parts of northern Aleppo. To the east they hold the areas around Manbij. In between them the Turks hold the area around Al-Bab. What makes things tricky for the Kurds is they cannot unite their territories in the east and west without engaging Turkish forces, which would give Turkish President Erdogan the excuse he needs to go full in with large military forces. So, realistically, the Kurds have no hope of holding the area of Northern Aleppo.
They also have no realistic hope of holding their territories on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River centered on Manbij. As I write this, Syrian and Russian forces are making big advances shown as pink on the map. (see operational map below) They are pushing to and reaching the Euphrates River to the southern flank of the Kurds Manjib beach head. It is now only a matter of time before the Kurds will have to withdraw from the Manbij area to the eastern bank of the Euphrates River. Here their position is far more defensible from the Syrian army, and to a lesser extent the Turkish Army.
That makes the Euphrates River the new dividing line in the battle for Syria - the divide between the Kurds/Americans and everyone else. There is, however, a weak link in that line of defence - Deir al- Zour. This city and nearby airbase is controlled by the Syrian army, and is located to the south of Al- Raqqa (the ISIS self declared capital on the Euphrates. This map gives you a good idea of the area and the cities involved:
Deir al- Zour bridges the Euphrates and leaves any Kurdish partition of North Eastern Syria highly vulnerable. In fact, it makes such a complete partition almost impossible to defend. Currently, the Kurds and Americans are concentrating their forces on the battle to retake Al-Raqqa. They have it surrounded on three sides with its back to the Euphrates. The US has just deployed 2200 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, and 1000 reservists to Kuwait in preparation for the final battle of Al-Raqqa. They have also deployed air mobile artillery, and the 400 troops that go with it, directly to the Al-Raqqa front. As of this morning the Americans and Kurds were within 50 km of the northern gates to Al-Raqqa. It may be a grind, but ISIS has no hope of winning that battle. Al-Raqqa will be laid to waste by American artillery and air strikes.
What comes then? Well, if the American and Kurdish intention is to create a Kurdish territory out of North eastern Syria, which this writer considers a foregone conclusion, then a battle for Dier-al-Zour will be next. It is a strategic must to seal a gaping hole in the Euphrates River defence concept. That will involve the Americans and Kurds attacking the Syrian and Russian military located there. A dangerous proposition indeed.
It has always been the case, since the ISIS advance was halted on the door steps of Bagdad, that the real danger of foreign powers throwing international law to the wind would play itself out once their common menace had been eliminated. We are almost at that point now. Mosul is essentially finished for ISIS. Al-Raqqa is surrounded. It's like the final weeks of Nazi Germany for ISIS right now. What unfolded after Nazi Germany fell was the iron curtain, the Berlin Wall, and the Cold War. Will that happen in Syria? Will the Americans put the brakes on and hold the Kurds to the eastern banks of the Euphrates? Will the Syrians and Russians be prepared to allow that to happen while they turn their attention toward the areas around Damascus and Ibdib that still require action to rid them of Islamic and Turkmen militias? Would that be a fatal move for Syria? And what of Turkey? Would it be prepared to allow a new Kurdish region to be added to the autonomous Kurdish region in Northern Iraq? That would leave just the South Eastern area of Turkey for the Kurds to capture and form their treasured vision of a united Kurdistan - one that already has the implicit and military backing of the United States.
The most plausible scenario, given the pragmatic chess strategy of Russian President Putin, is that the Syrians take the western bank of the Euphrates, and the Kurds/Americans take the Eastern bank - for now. Then the Russians and Syrians will turn their focus to the pockets of resistance in North Western Syria, and isolated pockets around Damascus and their border with Lebanon (Hezbollah and Iran likely playing a predominant role there). It seems Putin is willing to forestall any one-on-one confrontation with the US until after his rearmament program is finished - around 2020. In the mean time he is in the defensive mode, as is clearly demonstrated in the conflict in Eastern Ukraine. The problem with his strategy, as can be quite clearly seen in the Ukraine conflict, is that it gives the Americans time to establish positions in the area, and reinforce/bolster the local military. Now, instead of Russia taking on an isolated Ukrainian military of 50,000 it faces an unofficially NATO aligned country with over 200,000 troops. The same scenario is almost certainly going to play out in the Kurdish territories. In some ways, if you're Putin, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
The real lesson in all of this is that abandoning the rules of order for expediency can never be sanctioned, and that to see it any other way is to invite chaos to the orderly conduct of societies around the world. It has to be said, because it is patently obvious, that the Americans hold the full responsibility for chaos that their cavalier actions have created in the world. They have changed the term "national interest" into the all encompassing "national right". They have claimed the world as their own with no right to do so. An unfortunate, but predictable consequence of the fall of the Soviet Union. A living case of power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely. They have perverted the "peace dividend" that was so greatly lauded when the Berlin Wall fell into a "we'll take what we want when we want dividend", and in doing so turned the world against them. It is the Americans who were not invited into Syria to help fight ISIS. Just as it was the Americans that fanned the flames of the civil unrest in Syria to begin with, and it was the Americans, in conjunction with the Saudis, that financed it.
The only solution for Syria is that Syrians decide what their country will be. To demand otherwise is to place yourself in a type of arrogance not befitting the average person. Always remember it is not righteous people who start wars, it is the self-righteous. The ones that place their beliefs above all others and enforce them over all others. Recent history has shown that the Americans will not allow the Syrians to decide the future of their country, and that is a terrible indictment upon them. It is also a terrible indictment against the rest of us that we allow this type of "God syndrome" to have a place in the civilized world we claim ours to be. In that way, Syria today is a reflection on all of us - our greed, our arrogance, our uncaring hypocrisy. The very same traits that have their roots in all our conflicts of the past. It shows that despite all our achievements as a species, when all that is stripped away, we continue to act as though we still carry clubs and dwell in caves. That's the really sad part of it all.
Tuesday, December 20, 2016
Russia is Dead Wrong on Turkey
The question of Turkey as a reliable international partner has swum around my mind for some time now. There was the infamous case of the Israeli commandos landing on an aid ship destined for Gaza, in which several people were killed. Turkish President Erdogan immediately broke a long standing relationship with Israel, and even threatened to have future such convoys escorted by the Turkish navy. Presumably, he was prepared to go to war with Israel over the issue of the Palestinians in Gaza. Considering the ramifications of that action on Turkey, Israel and the world community, it must be said that Erdogan operates on the slippery end of sanity and/or judgement. In other words, he is a hot head with an ego the size of his country, and judgement normally associated with school children fighting in the playground. It may also be adduced that he is a war monger waiting for the chance for that one big war that will give him glory in the history books of Turkey.
Little has happened to change my assessment of either Erdogan or Turkey from that time til now. Erdogan has lashed out at its largest trading partner Germany, and now has a very chilly relationship there. Turkey itself is on the cusp of being forever banned from entry into the European Union. However, the real eye opener has come in the form of the Syrian War. The first major incident, other than all the shouting from the sidelines, was the shooting down of a Russian bomber in Northern Syria. It was clearly an ambush by two Turkish fighters on a Russian fighter bomber which was not designed to really defend itself against such an attack, because it is primarily a bomber and not a fighter. The pilot was killed parachuting to the ground by Turkish supported militants in Syria.
Then there was the Turkish invasion of Northern Syria under the pretext of ridding its border of Syrian terrorists. Of course it just happened to be coincidental that the Kurds were taking over Northern Syria, and the Kurds want to establish their own country which is to include a bite size piece of South Eastern Turkey. Erdogan said at the time, fresh from surviving a coup against him, that Turkey was only securing its border and was not attempting to cause Syria's president to lose power. All well and good Russia likely thought. We have a "partner" to help us get rid of all these terrorists and rebels in Syria. However, just a few weeks ago, Erdogan was caught on camera at a relatively private event, stating that Turkey was in Syria to get rid of its President Assad, and that it had no other purpose but that.
Well that was no doubt a bit of a shock to Russia who was in the process of renewing relations with Turkey. There were hurried assurances from the Russian foreign ministry that they would seek clarification from Erdogan, and public statements saying the Russian government would "rely on the previous official position of the Turkish government. Perhaps not surprisingly, Erdogan never came out and publicly qualified his remarks. Instead the whole matter was left to quietly go away so to speak. Yet, a comment such as that can never go away. It rests, now quietly, at the heart of Turkish involvement in Syria. The Russian government seemed to want to paper over the issue and carry on with its primary focus of defeating the militants/terrorists. But can it be papered over, or is it a snake in the grass waiting to strike at the right moment?
Yesterday the world witnessed the very public execution of Russia's Ambassador to Turkey on live TV. It struck me that the occasion was almost set up for such a purpose. The most obvious question of course is why was there no security for the Ambassador? That is the responsibility of the country in which an ambassador is located. There was none. The Turkish police officer was able to simply walk up behind the Ambassador, directly in the TV cameras eye, and wait like the executioner for his moment. It had all the callings of one of those grotesque ISIS execution videos. After he killed the Ambassador the assassin pounced around in front of the TV uttering calls to remember Aleppo and Syria. Bottom line is it was all too easy, and all too public to be anything other than state arranged. The Turkish government even began immediately blaming the Gulen movement - their sworn enemies outed in that Turkish coup. All too convenient. All to staged.
That brings us to the press conference today between the Foreign Ministers of Russia, Iran and Turkey. The Turkish Foreign Minister's condolences to the Russian people for the killing of its ambassador was so "business-like" that it chilled the blood. But that was just the beginning. After the obligatory comments of how they all agree on the need to defeat this, that, and the other thing, the press were allowed one question of each foreign minister. The Iranian journalist asked what the three countries had agreed to as measures to stop third parties supporting the militants/terrorists in Syria. It was all going fine until the Turkish Foreign Minister indignantly piped in that the freezing of support for militants/terrorists had to include Hezbollah. Of course Hezbollah is supported by Iran, and that may have been Turkey's way of defending itself for supporting Turkmen militants/terrorists in Northern Syria. Whatever the case, it became quickly crystal clear that the Turks were prepared to throw aside their "team work" at the very smallest of challenges.
In other words the Turks cannot be trusted. The Americans can't trust them and the Russians can't trust them. That's the way they want it. The strong defender of their neighborhood. Beholding to no body, and loyal to nobody. A regional super power that must be dealt with in the region as if it was militarily equal to the US or Russia. In a strange way though, Turkey may be right. Both Russia and the US are entangled all over the map and stretched thin combatting each other's various moves. With Turkey focusing its strength solely in the "neighborhood" perhaps they have achieved that goal of regional super power. Of course, if things go hot, and either Russia or the US decide to move into the area in force, Turkey will quickly find out its true position, but in the mean time there it is.
The question for Russia is how long does it plan to dance the dance of a thousand veils with Turkey? Is Turkey causing more problems than it is solving? Or perhaps more importantly, how long will you let Turkey embarrass you internationally? It's not many countries that could shoot down a super power's military aircraft, and kill its pilot, and then have their ambassador publicly executed on international television, and get away with it. The press conference today was quite clear, working with Turkey is like herding alley cats. Unfortunately for Russia, such behaviour by the Turks does nothing to enhance Russia's international reputation. Actually the reverse is true. Russia's image is being tarnished by its association, for whatever reasons, with Turkey. Is that purposeful on Turkey's part? Hard to say. One thing is true though, there are only so many coincidences in international politics, and Turkey is not immune from that rule. The Kremlin has made a grave mistake in throwing an arm of brotherhood over Turkey's shoulder. It is not a brother, but rather a poison chalice. It becomes clearer every day. If Russia is wise it will let that cup pass from its lip.
Little has happened to change my assessment of either Erdogan or Turkey from that time til now. Erdogan has lashed out at its largest trading partner Germany, and now has a very chilly relationship there. Turkey itself is on the cusp of being forever banned from entry into the European Union. However, the real eye opener has come in the form of the Syrian War. The first major incident, other than all the shouting from the sidelines, was the shooting down of a Russian bomber in Northern Syria. It was clearly an ambush by two Turkish fighters on a Russian fighter bomber which was not designed to really defend itself against such an attack, because it is primarily a bomber and not a fighter. The pilot was killed parachuting to the ground by Turkish supported militants in Syria.
Then there was the Turkish invasion of Northern Syria under the pretext of ridding its border of Syrian terrorists. Of course it just happened to be coincidental that the Kurds were taking over Northern Syria, and the Kurds want to establish their own country which is to include a bite size piece of South Eastern Turkey. Erdogan said at the time, fresh from surviving a coup against him, that Turkey was only securing its border and was not attempting to cause Syria's president to lose power. All well and good Russia likely thought. We have a "partner" to help us get rid of all these terrorists and rebels in Syria. However, just a few weeks ago, Erdogan was caught on camera at a relatively private event, stating that Turkey was in Syria to get rid of its President Assad, and that it had no other purpose but that.
Well that was no doubt a bit of a shock to Russia who was in the process of renewing relations with Turkey. There were hurried assurances from the Russian foreign ministry that they would seek clarification from Erdogan, and public statements saying the Russian government would "rely on the previous official position of the Turkish government. Perhaps not surprisingly, Erdogan never came out and publicly qualified his remarks. Instead the whole matter was left to quietly go away so to speak. Yet, a comment such as that can never go away. It rests, now quietly, at the heart of Turkish involvement in Syria. The Russian government seemed to want to paper over the issue and carry on with its primary focus of defeating the militants/terrorists. But can it be papered over, or is it a snake in the grass waiting to strike at the right moment?
Yesterday the world witnessed the very public execution of Russia's Ambassador to Turkey on live TV. It struck me that the occasion was almost set up for such a purpose. The most obvious question of course is why was there no security for the Ambassador? That is the responsibility of the country in which an ambassador is located. There was none. The Turkish police officer was able to simply walk up behind the Ambassador, directly in the TV cameras eye, and wait like the executioner for his moment. It had all the callings of one of those grotesque ISIS execution videos. After he killed the Ambassador the assassin pounced around in front of the TV uttering calls to remember Aleppo and Syria. Bottom line is it was all too easy, and all too public to be anything other than state arranged. The Turkish government even began immediately blaming the Gulen movement - their sworn enemies outed in that Turkish coup. All too convenient. All to staged.
That brings us to the press conference today between the Foreign Ministers of Russia, Iran and Turkey. The Turkish Foreign Minister's condolences to the Russian people for the killing of its ambassador was so "business-like" that it chilled the blood. But that was just the beginning. After the obligatory comments of how they all agree on the need to defeat this, that, and the other thing, the press were allowed one question of each foreign minister. The Iranian journalist asked what the three countries had agreed to as measures to stop third parties supporting the militants/terrorists in Syria. It was all going fine until the Turkish Foreign Minister indignantly piped in that the freezing of support for militants/terrorists had to include Hezbollah. Of course Hezbollah is supported by Iran, and that may have been Turkey's way of defending itself for supporting Turkmen militants/terrorists in Northern Syria. Whatever the case, it became quickly crystal clear that the Turks were prepared to throw aside their "team work" at the very smallest of challenges.
In other words the Turks cannot be trusted. The Americans can't trust them and the Russians can't trust them. That's the way they want it. The strong defender of their neighborhood. Beholding to no body, and loyal to nobody. A regional super power that must be dealt with in the region as if it was militarily equal to the US or Russia. In a strange way though, Turkey may be right. Both Russia and the US are entangled all over the map and stretched thin combatting each other's various moves. With Turkey focusing its strength solely in the "neighborhood" perhaps they have achieved that goal of regional super power. Of course, if things go hot, and either Russia or the US decide to move into the area in force, Turkey will quickly find out its true position, but in the mean time there it is.
The question for Russia is how long does it plan to dance the dance of a thousand veils with Turkey? Is Turkey causing more problems than it is solving? Or perhaps more importantly, how long will you let Turkey embarrass you internationally? It's not many countries that could shoot down a super power's military aircraft, and kill its pilot, and then have their ambassador publicly executed on international television, and get away with it. The press conference today was quite clear, working with Turkey is like herding alley cats. Unfortunately for Russia, such behaviour by the Turks does nothing to enhance Russia's international reputation. Actually the reverse is true. Russia's image is being tarnished by its association, for whatever reasons, with Turkey. Is that purposeful on Turkey's part? Hard to say. One thing is true though, there are only so many coincidences in international politics, and Turkey is not immune from that rule. The Kremlin has made a grave mistake in throwing an arm of brotherhood over Turkey's shoulder. It is not a brother, but rather a poison chalice. It becomes clearer every day. If Russia is wise it will let that cup pass from its lip.
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Turkey Changes Sides.
They say that a week in politics is a long time, but for Turkey it was just a few short hours. First, scattered reports of soldiers blocking bridges. Then tanks at the Parliament. Fighter jets and helicopters appearing over the capital. Suddenly all hell was breaking loose on the streets - all covered by social media with main stream media playing catch up. Deathly silence from the US government for several hours. Ditto for Turkey's NATO allies. And then it all failed. Erdogan wasn't killed, and his call to supporters filled the streets. The mutineers were overwhelmed and the world went into damage control.
It was immediately evident to me, at least, that the attempted coup was a result of Erdogan's attempt at reconciliation with Moscow over Syria, and the role it had played there - including shooting down a Russian bomber. It was also clear to me that Erdogan was making such moves, because his allies in the West were supporting the Kurds wholeheartedly in Syria. Essentially the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and for Turkey there is no bigger national security threat than the Kurds as they attempt to form a Kurdistan partially out of southern Turkey.
It must have become evident to Erdogan that US special forces embedded with the Kurds, and a US air base being constructed in Kurdish controlled areas of northern Syria was as big a signal as you will ever need - the US was an ally of the Kurds. You would have to be completely blind not to see that, and apparently the Turkish President is not blind. So, after giving an ultimatum to his Western allies of "the Kurds or us". Erdogan made good and shuffled toward Russia - the one country that could still turn the tide against the Kurds. I wrote about this eventuality last year here .
As ISIS is destroyed in Iraq and Syria the focus becomes the end game. The Kurds already controlled the northern region of Iraq as an "autonomous Kurdish area". ISIS put a large dent in that with its capture of Mosul, but the Iraqi army is positioning itself to assault ISIS in Mosul, and it's only a matter of time before it recaptures it - months even. So Turkey has positioned itself now, with Syria and Russia, to turn on the Kurds even before the war with ISIS is finished. In fact, this week saw the first major clashes between the Syrian army and the Kurds. It also witnessed the US scramble fighter jets against Syrian bombers hitting the Kurds. This is a foreboding of things to come.
The Americans are in northern Syria for good. Their construction of an airbase there is a signal of that. By doing so, the US has signalled not just to Syria, but to Iraq and Turkey, that they intend to assist the Kurds in the creation of a Kurdistan that takes territory from all three countries. This naturally concerns countries like Russia and Iran that are allies of Syria, and becoming very close allies of Iraq. Now Turkey is leaving the American club and heading over to the Russian club to take care of its own interests. Hence the often repeated word Erdogan uttered during his speech to the Turkish nation after the failed coup: " independence". Turkey is not saying that it is leaving NATO yet, but in effect it has "quit and stayed on". It is negotiating to allow Russia to use the massive air force base currently used by the US just 65 miles from the Syrian border - an unprecedented move for a NATO ally, which spurred the US to remove its nuclear weapons from the base this week.
It is becoming ever apparent that the West has really blown its own strategic legs off in the Middle east over the last two decades. Russia, and Eurasia in general, are simply filling the spot left in many ways. The US did the heavy lifting for them by its policies in Iraq, Iran, Syria, and now Turkey. Speaking of Eurasia, China announced this week it will be massively upping its commitment to the Syrian conflict with "advisers", and supplies (read weapons, ammunition, etc). Rather than isolating Russia, and by ricochet Eurasia, in the Middle East, the US is now isolated in a land locked spot in between three countries - a hopeless position. The coup-de-grace is that it is also severely alienating itself from all these extremely important and strategically desirable nations.
As Turkey gravitates now toward Eurasia, slow at first but then very quickly, the West will only have itself to blame. It's hard to see it any other way. The fact that it is in northern Syria without the consent of the Syrian government would normally be considered in international law as an act of war. The fact that it is directly assisting the Kurds to overthrow the elected Syrian government is a blatant violation of internal law. You can't claim to be the world's superpower rooted in democracy and the rule of law, and then blatantly toss those principles to the side for expediency whenever the notion suits. It's that very attitude, that very "real polik" that has been the undoing of US foreign policy and influence over the last 20 or so years. Yet, it appears to be a hard habit to break.
In any case, Turkey is on the verge of becoming a new Iran. An Islamic state that asserts its independence through a distinctly national defence industry and close ties to powerful friends to its north and east. A realignment that will be all consuming. Gone will be the German political and economic influence in Turkey. A relationship that is being tested by Turkey as I write this post. It's the "you're either with us or against us moment" or, as Erdogan put it:
"The PYD (Kurds) has been getting closer with both the United States and Russia of late. We view the PYD as a terrorist group and we want all countries to consider the consequences of their cooperation."
Apparently the ever wise Putin did, and the ever self-righteous US administration did not. This monumental shift in geo-politics is far greater than most people on this side of the world are giving it credit for. Turkey isn't just " another hot-headed country in the Middle East" as our media seems to paint it. It has one of the largest standing armies in the world, but far more importantly than that, Turkey is the southern flank of Russia and the bridge between Europe and the Middle East. That should signal something to western governments. What has been lost, and what has been gained? A sobering thought indeed.
It was immediately evident to me, at least, that the attempted coup was a result of Erdogan's attempt at reconciliation with Moscow over Syria, and the role it had played there - including shooting down a Russian bomber. It was also clear to me that Erdogan was making such moves, because his allies in the West were supporting the Kurds wholeheartedly in Syria. Essentially the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and for Turkey there is no bigger national security threat than the Kurds as they attempt to form a Kurdistan partially out of southern Turkey.
It must have become evident to Erdogan that US special forces embedded with the Kurds, and a US air base being constructed in Kurdish controlled areas of northern Syria was as big a signal as you will ever need - the US was an ally of the Kurds. You would have to be completely blind not to see that, and apparently the Turkish President is not blind. So, after giving an ultimatum to his Western allies of "the Kurds or us". Erdogan made good and shuffled toward Russia - the one country that could still turn the tide against the Kurds. I wrote about this eventuality last year here .
As ISIS is destroyed in Iraq and Syria the focus becomes the end game. The Kurds already controlled the northern region of Iraq as an "autonomous Kurdish area". ISIS put a large dent in that with its capture of Mosul, but the Iraqi army is positioning itself to assault ISIS in Mosul, and it's only a matter of time before it recaptures it - months even. So Turkey has positioned itself now, with Syria and Russia, to turn on the Kurds even before the war with ISIS is finished. In fact, this week saw the first major clashes between the Syrian army and the Kurds. It also witnessed the US scramble fighter jets against Syrian bombers hitting the Kurds. This is a foreboding of things to come.
The Americans are in northern Syria for good. Their construction of an airbase there is a signal of that. By doing so, the US has signalled not just to Syria, but to Iraq and Turkey, that they intend to assist the Kurds in the creation of a Kurdistan that takes territory from all three countries. This naturally concerns countries like Russia and Iran that are allies of Syria, and becoming very close allies of Iraq. Now Turkey is leaving the American club and heading over to the Russian club to take care of its own interests. Hence the often repeated word Erdogan uttered during his speech to the Turkish nation after the failed coup: " independence". Turkey is not saying that it is leaving NATO yet, but in effect it has "quit and stayed on". It is negotiating to allow Russia to use the massive air force base currently used by the US just 65 miles from the Syrian border - an unprecedented move for a NATO ally, which spurred the US to remove its nuclear weapons from the base this week.
It is becoming ever apparent that the West has really blown its own strategic legs off in the Middle east over the last two decades. Russia, and Eurasia in general, are simply filling the spot left in many ways. The US did the heavy lifting for them by its policies in Iraq, Iran, Syria, and now Turkey. Speaking of Eurasia, China announced this week it will be massively upping its commitment to the Syrian conflict with "advisers", and supplies (read weapons, ammunition, etc). Rather than isolating Russia, and by ricochet Eurasia, in the Middle East, the US is now isolated in a land locked spot in between three countries - a hopeless position. The coup-de-grace is that it is also severely alienating itself from all these extremely important and strategically desirable nations.
As Turkey gravitates now toward Eurasia, slow at first but then very quickly, the West will only have itself to blame. It's hard to see it any other way. The fact that it is in northern Syria without the consent of the Syrian government would normally be considered in international law as an act of war. The fact that it is directly assisting the Kurds to overthrow the elected Syrian government is a blatant violation of internal law. You can't claim to be the world's superpower rooted in democracy and the rule of law, and then blatantly toss those principles to the side for expediency whenever the notion suits. It's that very attitude, that very "real polik" that has been the undoing of US foreign policy and influence over the last 20 or so years. Yet, it appears to be a hard habit to break.
In any case, Turkey is on the verge of becoming a new Iran. An Islamic state that asserts its independence through a distinctly national defence industry and close ties to powerful friends to its north and east. A realignment that will be all consuming. Gone will be the German political and economic influence in Turkey. A relationship that is being tested by Turkey as I write this post. It's the "you're either with us or against us moment" or, as Erdogan put it:
"The PYD (Kurds) has been getting closer with both the United States and Russia of late. We view the PYD as a terrorist group and we want all countries to consider the consequences of their cooperation."
Apparently the ever wise Putin did, and the ever self-righteous US administration did not. This monumental shift in geo-politics is far greater than most people on this side of the world are giving it credit for. Turkey isn't just " another hot-headed country in the Middle East" as our media seems to paint it. It has one of the largest standing armies in the world, but far more importantly than that, Turkey is the southern flank of Russia and the bridge between Europe and the Middle East. That should signal something to western governments. What has been lost, and what has been gained? A sobering thought indeed.
Sunday, August 7, 2016
The Russian Ace - Khibiny
As the world seems to bounce from one disaster to another, all of our own making, one can't help but wonder where it will all end. Certainly there are signs that point toward a world conflict of "world war" scale. There is no question of that. Eurasia is slowly, but surely forming itself into a formidable trading bloc, and likely military alliance as well. Historically, the two have gone hand in hand, and the signs these days point to that same direction. Coproduction agreements, and arms development/sales deals are growing rapidly between China, Russia, Iran, India, and so on. Trends in international affairs, which this author has predicted for over a decade now, are grudgingly poking their collective heads up.
The recent coup attempt in Turkey has the potential to escalate the trend line very rapidly - destabilizing the geo-political balance so much that the reverberations will be felt intensely and world-wide. In a real sense, Turkey is the southern flank of the Eurasian project. Its very geography makes it key to accessing Russia's south (remember Gallipoli in WWI?) and the Middle East in general. Lately, Turkish President Erdogan had been moving Turkey toward a more friendly relationship with Russia. His government apologized to Russia for the downing of a Russian jet, and followed that with a statement suggesting peace with Syrian President Assad.
In fact, Erdogan was scheduled to meet in Moscow with Russian President Putin just two days before the coup. However, all that came to a sudden end when Erdogan was spirited out of his vacation home just prior to an attempt on his life by a platoon of Turkish special forces. Somehow he had gotten wind of it, boarded his jet, and jettisoned off toward Turkey's capital. While enroute to the capital his plane was "locked onto" by two Turkish F-16's. Despite locking onto Erdogan's jet the Turkish fighter pilots could not fire and bring it down - for whatever reason. The bottom line is that al the evidence points toward a very important Russian intervention in the coup - to stop it that is. It appears that Russian intelligence intercepted the coup plotter's communications and plans, alerted Erdogan in advance, and saving his life in the process. It likely also proved very clearly to Erdogan who his friends were, and who they were not. In any case, the mysterious escape from the lethal missiles of those two Turkish F-16s is really what this article is about.
Funny enough, Erdogan's saving grace seems to be a part of another trend that has raised its head for at least the last few years. Simply put, the Russians have developed technology that renders all missile systems, nuclear or conventional, useless. In November, 2014 the first high profile incident occurred when a Russian SU-24 fighter bomber shut down all systems on the USS Donald Cook in the Black Sea. The only armament the plane carried was a small basket - an important little basket known as "Khibiny" - perhaps named after the Russian mountain of the same name. In any case, the entire state-of-the-art destroyer was rendered unable to defend itself while the SU-24 flew eleven simulated bombing runs over it before flying off. The Cook's Aegis system (most modern US defence system) was shut down completely.
Then, just three weeks ago a military drone entered Israeli airspace from Syria. The Israeli military fired two Patriot missiles at the drone, but the deadly accurate missiles could not hit the slow and plodding drone. Then an Israeli fighter pilot fired an air-to-air missile at the drone, but the missile would not strike it. It appears quite obvious that the Russian drone had on board a system similar to the Khibiny electronic warfare device that shut down the Cook. However, this system appears to not jam the firing systems, but just the missiles themselves. That would be a variant of the system and essentially render anti-aircraft systems and fighter jets obsolete. It seems clear the Russians used the air-tight "Iron Dome" Israeli anti-missile system as a test for this technology. Not a bad choice considering Israel's small land mass and therefore concentrated air defence systems. Or, in other words, no better place to test it in the world.
There is no question that with the development of Khibiny , and its apparent variants, that Russia (and therefore Eurasia) has assumed a massive strategic advantage over NATO and other western military forces. How that will affect world balance of forces is yet to be seen, but there is no question it has the potential to be devastating for Russia's enemies on the battlefield and in world politics. Erdogan may be the first, and very public, example of how this new technology can shift the balance of power in the world. Russia has taken technological creativity to the next level - potentially rendering nuclear weapons obsolete (which would be great for the world). Russia now has its ace in the hole, and the only question that remains is how this new technology will change our world.
The recent coup attempt in Turkey has the potential to escalate the trend line very rapidly - destabilizing the geo-political balance so much that the reverberations will be felt intensely and world-wide. In a real sense, Turkey is the southern flank of the Eurasian project. Its very geography makes it key to accessing Russia's south (remember Gallipoli in WWI?) and the Middle East in general. Lately, Turkish President Erdogan had been moving Turkey toward a more friendly relationship with Russia. His government apologized to Russia for the downing of a Russian jet, and followed that with a statement suggesting peace with Syrian President Assad.
In fact, Erdogan was scheduled to meet in Moscow with Russian President Putin just two days before the coup. However, all that came to a sudden end when Erdogan was spirited out of his vacation home just prior to an attempt on his life by a platoon of Turkish special forces. Somehow he had gotten wind of it, boarded his jet, and jettisoned off toward Turkey's capital. While enroute to the capital his plane was "locked onto" by two Turkish F-16's. Despite locking onto Erdogan's jet the Turkish fighter pilots could not fire and bring it down - for whatever reason. The bottom line is that al the evidence points toward a very important Russian intervention in the coup - to stop it that is. It appears that Russian intelligence intercepted the coup plotter's communications and plans, alerted Erdogan in advance, and saving his life in the process. It likely also proved very clearly to Erdogan who his friends were, and who they were not. In any case, the mysterious escape from the lethal missiles of those two Turkish F-16s is really what this article is about.
Funny enough, Erdogan's saving grace seems to be a part of another trend that has raised its head for at least the last few years. Simply put, the Russians have developed technology that renders all missile systems, nuclear or conventional, useless. In November, 2014 the first high profile incident occurred when a Russian SU-24 fighter bomber shut down all systems on the USS Donald Cook in the Black Sea. The only armament the plane carried was a small basket - an important little basket known as "Khibiny" - perhaps named after the Russian mountain of the same name. In any case, the entire state-of-the-art destroyer was rendered unable to defend itself while the SU-24 flew eleven simulated bombing runs over it before flying off. The Cook's Aegis system (most modern US defence system) was shut down completely.
Then, just three weeks ago a military drone entered Israeli airspace from Syria. The Israeli military fired two Patriot missiles at the drone, but the deadly accurate missiles could not hit the slow and plodding drone. Then an Israeli fighter pilot fired an air-to-air missile at the drone, but the missile would not strike it. It appears quite obvious that the Russian drone had on board a system similar to the Khibiny electronic warfare device that shut down the Cook. However, this system appears to not jam the firing systems, but just the missiles themselves. That would be a variant of the system and essentially render anti-aircraft systems and fighter jets obsolete. It seems clear the Russians used the air-tight "Iron Dome" Israeli anti-missile system as a test for this technology. Not a bad choice considering Israel's small land mass and therefore concentrated air defence systems. Or, in other words, no better place to test it in the world.
There is no question that with the development of Khibiny , and its apparent variants, that Russia (and therefore Eurasia) has assumed a massive strategic advantage over NATO and other western military forces. How that will affect world balance of forces is yet to be seen, but there is no question it has the potential to be devastating for Russia's enemies on the battlefield and in world politics. Erdogan may be the first, and very public, example of how this new technology can shift the balance of power in the world. Russia has taken technological creativity to the next level - potentially rendering nuclear weapons obsolete (which would be great for the world). Russia now has its ace in the hole, and the only question that remains is how this new technology will change our world.
Saturday, February 13, 2016
Steps from Armageddon
Unfortunately, it now appears the world is heading to that long prophesized war in the Middle East that we have all feared - the battle of Armageddon. The Bible describes it as a massive war in the Middle East where millions of soldiers are consumed. It begins with Russia coming out of communism (Godlessness) and doing God's bidding by taking on the forces of the Eagle (the US). It predicts that Russia will defeat the combined might of the US at the battle of Armageddon, including the Israeli army, and then there will be a large earthquake which will consume the Russian forces there. Forgive me if the biblical interpretations aren't 100%, but you get the idea.
As a young fellow I used to wonder how the "Bear" (Russia) could possibly end up in the Middle East with massive armies. It didn't seem to make sense, However, today, we are mere moments from that exact circumstance. There is no denying it any further.
In my opinion the war in Syria and Ukraine and elsewhere around the globe has to do with one thing, and one thing only - the US dollar. Simplistic as that may sound, it has been obvious as the nose on your face that China and Russia have managed to undermine American world economic dominance. The replacing of the US dollar with the Chinese Yuan, or a Yuan backed world currency, has been an ongoing issue since at least 2010 when it was first publicly advocated at the Davos world economic forum in Switzerland. China's moves since then have shown a steady path toward that goal. The Eurasian economic, and in many ways military bloc, have developed to the strategic level. The Chinese and Russians are using their reserves of US dollars to purchase hard assets (ie: Chicago Stock Exchange, Canadian tar sands, etc), and more importantly to subsidize the economic consequences of their actions. For example, while the West applied massive sanctions against Russia for the Ukraine situation, Russia simply turned to China for financial backing. The Chinese used their US reserves for the purpose. And so it goes.
The truth of the matter is this: the West has lost the economic war. It's over. It has been for awhile. The West is simply "dog paddling". Signs of this are: negative interest rates by Western central banks; zero or near zero inflation rates and economic growth; and the inability of traditional stimuli to fire up economies. It's over. We simply sit on the very cusp of complete economic collapse. The same applies to the Eurasian economies, except they are far less indebted than we are (Russia's government debt to GDP ratio is 16%, Canada is 86.51 %, the US 102.98%) That part of the war is lost. The US/Saudi deal of the 1970's that allowed the US dollar to replace gold as the reserve currency is also undone. Saudi has been made redundant by technology for oil recovery, and by Russian and American production. In other words, the American cartel on oil has been irreversibly broken.
So all this leads us to today. One economically decaying super power facing the inevitable consequences of its own economic lack of discipline facing the rising contenders. The battlefield is switching to arms from dollars. The battlefields are the Middle East and the Pacific Rim. Turkey and Saudi Arabia, one a NATO ally, the other a US oil ally, are mere hours from starting the events that will lead to the battle that "consumes millions". A Turkish invasion of northern Syria is guaranteed. Today Saudi Arabia transferred fighter jets to Turkey to assist. That alliance also points to the almost certain invasion of southern Iraq by Saudi Arabia. That in turn will lead to the direct intervention of Iran against Saudi. If you ever watched Harry Potter, this is the real game of "Wizard's Chess". The Americans will come with their full military might to intervene (if you believe the Bible - which I do). Israel will for the most part stay pat and watch it unfold. However, even Israel will be turned on once the Americans have been defeated (if you believe the Bible - which I do).
The only question really left in my mind is: " Is this a bad thing, or is this simply God's will?". If it's God's will, and the Bible certainly says it is, then it's not a bad thing. Myself, I kind of hoped that humanity could rise above this kind of result, but that simply doesn't appear to be the case.
As a young fellow I used to wonder how the "Bear" (Russia) could possibly end up in the Middle East with massive armies. It didn't seem to make sense, However, today, we are mere moments from that exact circumstance. There is no denying it any further.
In my opinion the war in Syria and Ukraine and elsewhere around the globe has to do with one thing, and one thing only - the US dollar. Simplistic as that may sound, it has been obvious as the nose on your face that China and Russia have managed to undermine American world economic dominance. The replacing of the US dollar with the Chinese Yuan, or a Yuan backed world currency, has been an ongoing issue since at least 2010 when it was first publicly advocated at the Davos world economic forum in Switzerland. China's moves since then have shown a steady path toward that goal. The Eurasian economic, and in many ways military bloc, have developed to the strategic level. The Chinese and Russians are using their reserves of US dollars to purchase hard assets (ie: Chicago Stock Exchange, Canadian tar sands, etc), and more importantly to subsidize the economic consequences of their actions. For example, while the West applied massive sanctions against Russia for the Ukraine situation, Russia simply turned to China for financial backing. The Chinese used their US reserves for the purpose. And so it goes.
The truth of the matter is this: the West has lost the economic war. It's over. It has been for awhile. The West is simply "dog paddling". Signs of this are: negative interest rates by Western central banks; zero or near zero inflation rates and economic growth; and the inability of traditional stimuli to fire up economies. It's over. We simply sit on the very cusp of complete economic collapse. The same applies to the Eurasian economies, except they are far less indebted than we are (Russia's government debt to GDP ratio is 16%, Canada is 86.51 %, the US 102.98%) That part of the war is lost. The US/Saudi deal of the 1970's that allowed the US dollar to replace gold as the reserve currency is also undone. Saudi has been made redundant by technology for oil recovery, and by Russian and American production. In other words, the American cartel on oil has been irreversibly broken.
So all this leads us to today. One economically decaying super power facing the inevitable consequences of its own economic lack of discipline facing the rising contenders. The battlefield is switching to arms from dollars. The battlefields are the Middle East and the Pacific Rim. Turkey and Saudi Arabia, one a NATO ally, the other a US oil ally, are mere hours from starting the events that will lead to the battle that "consumes millions". A Turkish invasion of northern Syria is guaranteed. Today Saudi Arabia transferred fighter jets to Turkey to assist. That alliance also points to the almost certain invasion of southern Iraq by Saudi Arabia. That in turn will lead to the direct intervention of Iran against Saudi. If you ever watched Harry Potter, this is the real game of "Wizard's Chess". The Americans will come with their full military might to intervene (if you believe the Bible - which I do). Israel will for the most part stay pat and watch it unfold. However, even Israel will be turned on once the Americans have been defeated (if you believe the Bible - which I do).
The only question really left in my mind is: " Is this a bad thing, or is this simply God's will?". If it's God's will, and the Bible certainly says it is, then it's not a bad thing. Myself, I kind of hoped that humanity could rise above this kind of result, but that simply doesn't appear to be the case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)