Connect with us


America’s Asia Pivot: US THAAD to target Russia, China



America is the most formidable military state with multi arsenals of terror goods in store, including WMD, wanting to sell or use them in war in alien territories. Entire world has supported US plan to conquer the globe by allowing the Pentagon-CIA duo to commission military bases in many strategically important nations. Many third world nations, like India offer their own airbases to the Pentagon for exclusive military purposes.

Washington tries all possible permutations to make Russia and China pro-US proxy states to pursue exclusive NATO agenda while China outrightly ignores all such coercive efforts, Russia counter plays them, causing obstacles to US resolve to control the world single handedly.

For instance, the Putin government sees Syria as part of a broader struggle against the US drive to militarily encircle Russia. Targeting Russia-China duo is the top agenda of USA. Neocons and US regime in general are not entirely happy about emerging Russo-China equations and their increasing military ties. US President Obama’s Asia pivot agenda is taking a more advanced level now with the plan to deploy US THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system) to target Russia and China and now it is clear by Asia pivot Washington means both Russia and China. Earlier Obama signaled USA is only trying to weaken China alone and had no plan to antagonize Russia. But now Syrian conflict has led to bilateral crisis too.

The planned deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile system to the Korean Peninsula is part of US policy to provoke a war against Russia and China. It is extremely dangerous as part of the overall policy of the Obama govt to encircle Russia and China with the most advanced anti-ballistic missile systems which they openly declare are intended to be able to take out a counter strike force from Russia or from China. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang, however, urged Washington to cancel the imminent deployment, stressing that militarization of the Korean Peninsula could “seriously harm the strategic interests of China.”

Back in July, the USA and South Korea said they had made a final decision to deploy the THAAD missile system in the South, claiming it will only be used in defense against what they called North Korean threats. The decision came after Pyongyang conducted its fourth nuclear test in January, which was followed by a satellite launch and a string of test-launches of various missiles.

As pressure had been mounting from Russia, China and other nations on USA to dismantle the dangerous western military alliance NATO, USA moved ahead with a well planned strategy of creating the threat perceptions to retain NATO. This could on one major cause for the USA and imperialist allies to plan the Sept-11 which was executed in perfection by employing CIA agents including high profile Osama in the world’s most advanced country, has worked miracle for the USA, Europe and all their anti-Islamic nations to advance their global anti-Islam agenda more vigorously. The attacks helped USA and its NATO to invade and occupy and destabilize many Muslim nations, loot or destroy their energy resources. Syria may not be America’s last Muslim nation to be destabilized and thousands of Muslims killed as per the Neocon strategy.

Washington is intervening in Syria not to fight ”terrorism” or champion human rights, but to further its longstanding drive to assert unchallengeable US hegemony over the Middle East and its vast energy resources, and to deny access to both Russia and China. It is prepared to prolong the bloodshed as long as necessary to bring about regime change and prevent Russia from consolidating a government under current President Bashar al-Assad, or a successor that is amendable to Russian interests.


Domestic exploitation and colonialist looting plus genocides had been the order of the old world controlled by capitalist nations led by USA and Great Britain. Rocky opposition Soviet Russia offered to US unilateralism and militarism for decades forced the enemies of humanity to revise their exploitative imperialist and colonialist programs to enslave the third world nations. Exit of Soviet system has emboldened US led colonialist nations to resume invasion process to cripple the third world nations.

New world that emerged after the end of Cold War, has witnessed a new kind of international coalition of USA and Russia confusing and threatening third world nations.

One would feel shaky that the confrontational systems have merged to some extend leading to a confrontational cum cooperative attitude of both USA and Russia, fighting to dominate the world affairs, keeps the terror war and world alive with their regular conflictual rhetoric and interferences in the affairs of other countries. But that is not a healthy tendency as it threatens and wrecks the weak nations that do not fully obey Washington.

While USA does everything only advance its global interests, Russia fights against USA but only for itself.

Russia entered Syria, began attacking Syrians and others in Syria. Besides domination in the region, Moscow is eager to upset US plans in the region and for Russia.

Russia is beefing up Russian air defense systems inside Syria, deploying an advanced S-300 surface-to-air missile battery to protect the Russian naval base in the Syrian port city of Tartus.

Friction between Ankara and Washington has mounted in relation to the US use of Syrian Kurdish separatist militias as their main proxy force in northern Syria. Turkey is determined to drive back the Kurdish forces and prevent them from consolidating an autonomous territory on Turkey’s border.

Russian President Putin is scheduled to meet with his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in Turkey on October 10, the first such visit since Turkish military shot down a Russian jet on the Turkish-Syrian border in November 2015, presumably on instruction from the Pentagon and NATO.

Putin is said to guard the system that covers up the crimes (like journalist Anna Politkovskaya in 2006 or opposition leader Boris Nemtsov in 2015)—a system so corrupt that it would be very hard to decide where to let the truth emerge without having everything unravel

Permanent war advantages

USA is on war mode because that helps it control the world and its resources, militaries, intelligences, polices and media. After 15 years of waging aggressive war in the Middle East at the cost of millions of human deaths and the destabilization and destruction of entire Muslim societies as the target for ‘collective punishment” for the 2001 Sept-11 in USA, , Washington is the last one to deliver lectures on “war crimes.” UN officials estimate that as many as a million people may be driven from their homes in a US-backed Iraqi offensive, expected as early as next month, against the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, which is under the control of the Islamic State. Washington’s NATO ally in the region, Turkey, has issued public warnings about the upcoming Mosul offensive. Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim described US plans as “dangerous”

The breakdown of the Syrian ceasefire talks and the menacing military escalations by both sides are the product not merely of individual truce violations. On the US side, these were egregious, with the US-backed militias carrying out hundreds of attacks. Even more decisive was the September 17 US bombing of a Syrian government outpost near the town of Deir ez-Zor, killing and wounding nearly 200 troops. It served to blow up the ceasefire deal and prevent the implementation of a joint targeting and intelligence-sharing agreement with Russia that the US military command openly opposed.

USA takes care that Russia does not take any credit to end the war in Syria or anywhere in Arab world. So, USA is keen to escalate the war ignoring international law, though Obama pretends to be innocent, as usual a good boy, But in order to placate White House concerns over launching such direct military attacks against another country without authorization from the United Nations Security Council, it has been proposed that the strikes be carried out “covertly and without public acknowledgment. Both the CIA and the Pentagon bosses have already “expressed support for such ‘kinetic’ options because the fall of Aleppo would undermine America’s counterterrorism goals in Syria. This is of course a propaganda pretext for the launching of another direct US military intervention in the Middle East.

USA wants to escalate war in Arab world and hence opposes Russian proposals for ending the Syrian war. The Obama government reportedly considers escalating US military intervention in Syria In the wake of breaking off bilateral talks with Moscow on efforts to achieve a genuine truce and political settlement in the war-ravaged Arab country,. The classified military proposals include bombing Syrian air force runways using cruise missiles and other long-range weapons fired from coalition planes and ships, as well as other acts of military aggression. President Barack Obama may likely reject the proposal for military action, the combined pressure of the CIA and the military command may well force a shift in policy

The US military and intelligence apparatus seems fears is that the Russian-backed Syrian government offensive to overrun eastern Aleppo will deprive the so-called “rebels,” who have been armed, funded and directly paid by the CIA and US regional allies—Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Aleppo is their last stronghold in western Syria’s major population centers. This would spell a crushing reversal for the five-year-old war for regime change orchestrated by Washington. The claim that this would “undermine America’s counterterrorism goals” only underscores the fraud of the US war on terror.

Some countries like India have learned from experience that by antagonizing the formidable USA they could only invite troubles even from their neighbors, allies and friendly nations. India made “friends” with USA without straining historic ties with Russia as Russia remains India’s major arms exporter. India pumps out plenty of hard earned resources to USA in order to make USA in good humors and themselves to be its “good books” so that it could continue to occupy Jammu Kashmir and kill Muslims there. For USA the Kashmir issue concerning the life of Muslims, in fact does not concern and it has made India a profitable ally temporarily. India is terribly happy about new love of Americans towards them because it could play the “new energy” against Pakistan fairly easily. USA has no reason to be genuinely an ally with a nation is very close to Moscow- the chief target of NATO.

The “rogue” elements

USA seeks to make nuclear war feasible. US Defense Secretary who has openly called for a complete modernization of the entire nuclear stockpile in the USA just over the last few days and of course is the person pushing for the THAAD deployment in South Korea, for the deployment of anti-ballistic missiles in Hungary and Romania and on the Russian border in Europe.

Not wanting any kind of opposition to its continued domination worldwide in all respects and domains, USA argues that the end of Soviet communism has not made the world safe as there are still other “rogue” elements existing and emerging “fresh” in the world. Obviously Islam is the important enemy of west and capitalism although many Muslim nations have adopted capitalism a profitable aspect of their “faith”. Apart from Islam, Russia, China and their allies are the target of USA and its imperialist allies.

Meanwhile, Iran warns USA against targeting Syria army. A senior Iranian official and veteran diplomat has warned the United States against direct military intervention against the Syrian army, saying that would amount to “suicide” for the American forces. The Syrian nation, backed by Russia, can fight back potential American aggression.

So far, the USA has been supporting, with the provision of military hardware and likely intelligence sharing, the “moderate” militants fighting the Syrian government. Despite a recent case in which the USA directly targeted Syrian soldiers, which it said happened by mistake; Washington has refrained from direct military involvement in the Arab country.

President Barack Obama has previously portrayed involvement in another Middle East war as harmful to US interests. His reluctance to invade Syria, despite numerous past threats, has angered a number of Arab dictatorships opposed to President Assad. Recently, however, militant sources claimed the USA was resolved to prevent the fall of the Syrian city of Aleppo, a bastion of anti-Damascus militants that is the target of an ongoing Syrian and Russian campaign for liberation.

The US State Department also recently warned that it would be considering the suspension of “bilateral engagement” with Russia in Syria unless Moscow took “immediate steps to end the assault on Aleppo.”

Russia is more estranged from Europe and the USA than at any point since the end of the Cold War, and perhaps much longer ago than that. The president of Russia is simply a poor judge of the country’s interests.

The problem of unquestioning acceptance of information circulated by intelligence services—exists everywhere, but it seems especially acute in the Russian system where communist ideology has overpowering impact on the media. USA says this aspect makes defaming the USA and doubting its actions all too easy.

White House and Pentagon have no answer to genocides of millions of Muslims in its illegal war in Islamic world.


US worry is childish, to say the least, that Moscow would further strengthen its military deals with regional governments by selling weapon systems to defend against Israeli aggression if any.

The Kremlin fears that a successful US regime-change operation in Syria would serve as a stepping stone toward direct intervention in Russia, including through the unleashing of CIA-funded Islamist fighters drawn from Russia’s Caucasus region. Russian strategists argue that a US-backed client regime in Damascus could help funnel separatist forces, already trained on the Syrian battlefield, back into Russia to serve as Western proxies in a campaign to destabilize and ultimately dismember the Russian Federation.

It is almost six years that the people of Syria have been resisting interference by foreigners, especially the Westerners, with the USA at the top with a permanent war agenda. The Syrian nation has the capability to withstand US military intervention, and the Americans will not do that launch aggression.

Thus USA has not directly involved in Syrian war and it only arms and   promotes the opposition rebels. Recently, there has been talk of a scenario in which the USA would directly target the Syrian Arab Army, which is the army of the Syrian Arab Republic. A US led foreign-backed militancy has been going on in Syria since March 2011, with a plethora of armed groups — each supported by one foreign country or another — fighting the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

USA thinks Russia and China are still considering a new world order to check US imperialism. If the USA is panicked about the fact that a new paradigm based on humanity and progress has been put in place and they are willing to go to war to stop it and that is what is behind the THAAD missile as part of that policy. It is quite likely that pushed by the Neocons who recommend client states to serve the US causes globally, the USA might be willing to go to war first with China and then with Russia in order to stop the emerging new world economic order that is a “severe threat” to the British-American banking system which indeed is in a state of general collapse.

However, White House is weary about a new war that too against Russo-China, wasting more resources and losing solders. The USA has suffered a defeat in military campaigns both in Afghanistan and Iraq and a third adventure, in Syria, would hand Washington its third defeat — a more stinging one. Russia is eager USA loses war and Mideast is free of wars. If the Americans take military action in Syria, it will be a suicidal action; and their third military defeat in the region after Afghanistan and Iraq will be a stronger defeat.

USA stands fully exposed as coup maker in Turkey and more and more Turks hate USA. Turkey’s tensions with Washington and pursuit of its own regional (Kurdish) ambitions in Syria only serve to heighten the geopolitical tensions that could turn the Syrian war for regime change into a new world war. USA is concerned about hat.

It is well-known that the deployment of the US advanced missile system is just a check post against Russia as is “useless” against the North Korean provocation, so both the THAAD missile and the radar systems are aimed at encircling China and the Russian Far East. THAAD has been designed by USA to intercept ballistic missiles inside or just outside the atmosphere during their final phase of flight.

US actions do bring Russia and China together and stronger.

Continue Reading


What was the success-rate of the April 14th missiles against Syria?

Eric Zuesse



The U.S. and Russia provide diametrically opposite accounts of the percentages of U.S.-and-allied missiles that hit their targets in Syria on the night of April 13th-14th.

On the 14th, Russia’s military said that 71 of the 103 U.S.-and-allied missiles were shot down by Syria. But on this very same day, the U.S. announced that 105 missiles had been launched and “none intercepted.” So: Was the U.S. side’s success-rate 100%, as America claimed; or, instead, 31%, as Russia claimed? This difference is, obviously, huge.

During the subsequent days, U.S.-and-allied media celebrated their side’s alleged victory; for example, on April 22nd, USA Today bannered “105 to 0: Why Syria’s air defenses failed to intercept a single incoming missile”, and reported that:

U.S., French and British forces launched 105 missiles from aircraft and ships at three chemical weapons facilities in Syria last weekend in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack launched by the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Russia claimed that Syrian defenses knocked down many incoming missiles, but the Pentagon said every weapon hit its intended target, dismissing the Russian comments as a disinformation campaign.

As of yet, the Russian side has not accused the U.S. side of a “disinformation campaign” about this. However, it has stuck to its guns and not backed down about its own, directly opposite, assertions; for example, Russia on April 16th gave a detailed breakdown of the results of the U.S.-and-allied bombing, and reported at (at 1:32:30), “a total of 103 cruise missiles were targeting the Syrian targets, and 71 [missiles] were taken out.” That claim would be a 69% Syrian-and-allied (defensive) success-rate, and a 31% U.S.-and-allied (aggressive) success-rate, on this event, which was the biggest direct military confrontation between Russian and American (and French and UK) forces, ever. This was also, therefore, arguably, the actual start of World War III.

The issue in the wake of the U.S. side’s invasion here — the crucial issue — is the relative functionality of the two sides’ conventional weaponries, and perhaps even more broadly of their militaries: the functionality of, and preparedness for, the conventional stage, preceding the strategic nuclear stage, in WW III. Presumably, after the conventional phase will have its ultimate winner and loser, the loser will suddenly unleash its nuclear forces against the other, so as to avoid defeat. The first side to attack will have the advantage to achieve a nuclear victory. The nuclear phase of the war will be over within around 30 minutes. In military matters, to ‘win’ means simply suffering less damage than does the opponent; and the first to attack will destroy some of the opponent’s retaliatory strategic weapons. Only conventional weaponry is involved at the present stage, the conventional-war phase; but, if things do reach the nuclear stage between these two sides, then even the side that ‘wins’ the war will be far more totally destroyed than even the loser has been in any prior war in history.

On April 25th, a Russian news-site headlined (as autotranslated) “The Russian military showed the remains of downed Coalition missiles in Syria” and reported that:

The Russian Defense Ministry showed the wreckage of the American Tomahawk missiles and European TOOL, the Storm Shadow. At the disposal of the military were large fragments of the engines and control systems, parts of the fuselage. And many of them show visible marks from shrapnel. This proves the fact that the missiles were intercepted by air defense systems.

Although the truth about this matter might not be of much interest to voters in any country, it will matter a great deal to the ruling aristocracies in any countries, such as Turkey, which are now making decisions between buying weapons made by the U.S. side, or else buying weapons made by the Russian side. And those decisions, in turn, will factor heavily into the choosing-up-of-sides in WW III, if neither the U.S nor Russia backs down so that a full-fledged hot war between U.S. and Russia results.

Consequently, the question as to which of these two sides is lying, is geostrategically very important. If Russia is telling the truth, then the sway will be favorable to Russia; if America is telling the truth, America will benefit.

Also: ever since the U.S. misrepresented the evidence regarding “Saddam’s WMD” in the lead-up to America’s 2003 invasion-and-occupation of Iraq, the question as to whether or not the assertions by the U.S. Government are lies is at least as severe as is the question as to whether the Russian Government lies. Presumably, both sides do (though one side might be lying far more than does the other); but, the question here concerns, in particular, military matters, and even the fate of the world. Lying in order to ‘justify’ an invasion is as serious a matter as exists, anywhere, anytime; and, if the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons will determine that the U.S.-and-allied invasion of Syria on April 14th was likewise based upon lies, then the consequences of what happened in that invasion will be even larger than merely the military competencies of the two respective sides.

On April 25th, Russia’s Sputnik News bannered “OPCW Finds No Chemical Weapons at Syrian Facilities Bombed by US – Russian MoD”, and so it’s not only the U.S. side’s military competency that is yet to be determined, but — again, as had happened in 2003 Iraq — whether or not the U.S. now routinely lies in order to ‘justify’ its invasions. That might turn out to be an issue of interest not only to the ruling aristocracies, but to their respective subjects.

Perhaps neither of the two sides will back down as between there having been an American missiles-success-rate of 100%, or of 31%, but the OPCW represents a higher authority than does any nation; it represents, in fact, 192 nations. If the finding by the OPCW turns out to confirm the U.S. Government’s accusation (that Syria’s government had used chemicals on April 7th against its own people) which was used to justify the April 14th invasion, then the invasion will retroactively thereby receive at least some degree of moral, if not legal, confirmation. But if the finding turns out to disconfirm that accusation, then the April 14th invasion will be seen instead as a smaller version of George W. Bush’s and Tony Blair’s clearly illegal and unjustified 20 March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Repeating that type of invasion, now, even though far smaller than happened in 2003, would indicate to the entire world that the United States is an enduring and systematic threat to world peace. The stakes are high for both sides, regardless of what the finding by the OPCW turns out to be.

Continue Reading


Negating Nuclear Bluff



The war of words between India and Pakistan’s militaries prove that both South Asian nuclear states are intertwined in a traditional security competition. Indian Army Chief Gen. Bipin Rawat, while delivering the annual Army dinner, stated:”We will call the (nuclear) bluff of Pakistan. If we will have to really confront the Pakistanis, and a task is given to us, we are not going to say we cannot cross the border because they have nuclear weapons. We will have to call their nuclear bluff.” Such statements of calling the ‘nuclear bluff’, ‘increased cross- border firing by Indian forces, which coupled with the proclamation of surgical strikes can lead to crisis instability in the region.

Director General Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Major General Asif Ghafoor responded to the Indian army chief’s ‘nuclear bluff’ assertion by saying that such statements are unbecoming from a person of a responsible stature. He further stated that “Well, it’s their choice. Should they wish to test our resolve they may try and see it for them..…Pakistan’s credible nuclear deterrence is the only thing stopping India from a war.” Such statements by the Indian military officials, and a quick calculated response from Pakistan, have raised the concerns of security analysts regarding the regional security and strategic dynamics.

It could be an appropriate tactic of General Bipin for securing finances for the modernization of the Army, but an absurd and destabilizing statement for the strategic stability in South Asia. According to the analysts, such statements by Indian military officials can lead to crisis instability and force the Pakistan to hasten its evolution towards war fighting nuclear doctrine. Another alarming reality is that General Bipin has failed to realize the repercussions of misreading Pakistan’s nuclear weapon capability and too much confidence in India’s Cold Start Doctrine. Hence, Pakistan’s successful test of the ‘submarine-launched cruise missile Babur (SLCM Babur)’ can be viewed as a befitting response to India.

According to Pakistan’s Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), Babur is submarine-launched cruise missile with range of 450 km. It was fired “from an underwater dynamic platform” and “successfully engaged its target with precise accuracy; meeting all … flight parameters”. The development of Babur (SLCM) is a significant component of a “credible second-strike capability” and a step towards reinforcing Pakistan’s policy of Credible Minimum Deterrence through self-reliance and indigenization.

Previously, on January 9, 2017, Pakistan conducted its first successful test of indigenously developed submarine launched cruise missile Babur-III.  Babur-III is also advanced, mature and indigenously developed series of cruise missiles. The First test of Babur-III was considered by Pakistan’ security planners as a major milestone and a right step in right direction towards reliable second strike capability. After the successful test of  Babur-III, Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, while congratulating the nation and the military on the first successful test-fire of the Submarine Launched Cruise Missile stated: “The successful test of Babur-3 is a manifestation of Pakistan’s technological progress and self-reliance.” He added: “Pakistan always maintains policy of peaceful co-existence but this test is a step towards reinforcing policy of credible minimum deterrence.” Therefore successful test of Babur-III, submarine launched cruise missile finalized the triad of Pakistan’s nuclear forces and second test of Babar on March 9, 2018 has enhanced Pakistan’s deterrence based on Second Strike Capability.

Another significant factor which forced Pakistan to acquire Second Strike Capability is India’s doctrinal transformation as it is clearly transforming its Nuclear Doctrine. New trends are emerging in India’s nuclear strategy as it is moving towards a ‘first-use’ or even a ‘first-strike nuclear strategy’. India’s nuclear doctrine is based on the ‘strategic ambiguity’, therefore it has been anticipated that India is shifting its nuclear strategy towards ‘counterforce targets’ rather than ‘counter value targets’. The second emerging trend is that India is moving towards the strategy of “First Use” or “Preemptive strike” from the “No-First Use strategy”. The abandoning of no first-use, development of missiles defense shield, fake claims of surgical strikes and calling the nuclear bluff are developments that are perilous for the regional security. Indeed, such events have forced Pakistan to maintain deterrence through qualitative and quantitative developments in nuclear forces. In the strategic landscape of South Asia, the presence of Pakistan’s credible second-strike capability is imperative for the continuity of the strategic stability between/among strategic competitors: India and Pakistan.

Subsequently, harsh statements by Indian military, its shifting nuclear doctrines and maturing sea based/ballistic missile defense developments capabilities are threatening for Pakistan. Such developments by India have been countered by Pakistan by carrying out two tests of nuclear-capable missiles, ‘Babur-3’ submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM) and ‘Babar’. Pakistan’s tests of SLCM has further reinforced the debate on South Asian maritime security, second-strike capability and missile defense technologies in the regional landscape. To conclude, it’s impossible for the Indians to alter the strategic equilibrium between India and Pakistan. Though Islamabad is not matching the Indian conventional military buildup, yet it is gradually advancing its nuclear arsenal. Hence, Pakistan’s successful test of indigenous Submarine Launched Cruise (SLC) Missile ‘Babur’ has negated India’s desire to call Pakistan’s ‘nuclear bluff’ and has augmented the credibility of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence strategy. Addition of ‘Babur’ in Pakistan’s military inventory confirms that Pakistan armed forces are prepared to thwart any kind of Indian armed forces military adventurism.

Continue Reading


A Likely Path to Nuclear Annihilation

Eric Zuesse



U.S. President Donald Trump asserted on the morning of April 12th, “Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all!” This statement from him is interpreted here as constituting a public promise from him to start the overt phase of America’s invasion of sovereign Syrian territory, no longer just continue the prior phase, which has relied instead upon America’s proxy forces, which originally were the ones that were led by (U.S.-Saudi-Qatari-UAE supplied and armed) Al Qaeda in Syria, but increasingly now are Syria’s Kurds, which have taken control over a third of Syrian territory, in Syria’s northeast. This area includes the oil-producing region, from Deir Ezzor northward, and the conquest would cripple Syria’s economic future, so that U.S-Saudi control of the entire country would be only a matter of time.

On April 4th, Emily Burchfield, a program assistant at the Atlantic Council — NATO’s leading PR agency — headlined the following, in order to explain the U.S. military’s (i.e., NATO’s) objectives in Syria (and the whole headline-bloc is quoted here, because it succinctly states the article itself): Analysis: Washington Still Has Work to Do in Former ISIS Territories

Before the U.S. pulls out of Syria, Washington needs to address a governance gap left in some former ISIS territories. Otherwise, marginalized Arab communities will likely ally with the Syrian government or extremist forces, writes Emily Burchfield of the Atlantic Council.

The U.S. military, in other words, cannot accept that “marginalized Arab communities” will “ally with the Syrian government.” Analogous within the United States itself would be if some foreign power refused to accept that “marginalized White communities” will “ally with the U.S. government.” In other words: this is clearly a military demand (a demand that came to be expressed here by a paid employee of NATO’s top PR agency, the Atlantic Council) to break up the country.

Whereas the prior U.S. President, Barack Obama, had tried everything short of all-out direct military invasion — as contrasted to indirect invasion by U.S. proxy armies of jihadist mercenaries — in order to conquer or at least to break up Syria, the current U.S. President, Trump, is resorting now to the direct military invasion route: he’s taking the path that Obama had declined to take.

Syria’s allies are Iran and Russia. These allies have enabled Syria to survive this long, and they all would be capitulating to the U.S. if they accepted the U.S. military invasion of Syria. For them to do that, would be for them to display, to the entire world, that the United States is their master. The U.S. Empire would, in effect, be official, no longer merely aspirational.

In the case of Russia, since it is the other nuclear super-power, this would be not just a surrender to the other nuclear super-power, but also Russia’s doing that without even waging a conventional-forces war against the U.S. Empire. That is extremely unlikely.

Consequently, Russia is probably now (on April 12th) coordinating with Iran, and with its allies, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, a conventional-forces war against the invaders.

If that conventional-forces war inflicts more damage to U.S.-and-allied forces than they inflict against Syria, that would, in military terms, constitute a “military defeat” for the U.S.

This would leave the U.S. only two options:

Either accept that Russia is another nuclear super-power (which the U.S. Deep State has refused to accept), and end the previously subterranian war to conquer it that was started by George Herbert Walker Bush on the night of 24 February 1990, or else blitz-attack Russia itself in order to eliminate enough of Russia’s retaliatory weapons so as to ‘win’ the nuclear war — i.e., inflict even more destruction upon Russia than Russia would still possess and control the surviving weaponry to inflict against America in response.

Continue Reading


Tech2 hours ago

Djibouti Launches Digital Transformation to Improve Services to Citizens

The World Bank announced today new support for Djibouti’s ongoing efforts to leverage digital technology to bring government closer to...

East Asia4 hours ago

The issue of peace in North Korea and Asia

Much has already been decided in the best way for peace on the Korean peninsula and, indirectly, in the South...

Newsdesk5 hours ago

ADB to Help Improve Water Governance, Develop Regional Urban Investment Plan for Mongolia

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has agreed to provide two technical assistance (TA) grants totaling $2.5 million to help the...

Africa6 hours ago

Economic and investment potential of Gambia

The Gambia is a small country in West Africa and is entirely surrounded by Senegal except for its coastline on the Atlantic Ocean. English language is...

South Asia7 hours ago

The Expansion of China’s Public Diplomacy Towards Pakistan

China is practicing public diplomacy globally but inducing neighboring regions is its initial priority. China’s active involvement in peacekeeping and...

Energy8 hours ago

Indonesia: Growing Flores’s “Geothermal Garden”

Flores, an Indonesian island named for its beautiful flora, is the test-bed of a newly adapted classification guidelines for geothermal...

Energy9 hours ago

India fuels the Global Energy Discourse: A round-up of the 2018 IEF Ministerial conference

India recently took another step in showcasing its potential for global leadership in the field of sustainable development by hosting...



Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy