Who Gets to Pick the Winner in Syria?

As the civil war continues to murder innocents with the latest estimate approaching one-hundred-thousand murdered civilians and over one and a half million refugees fled to neighboring Turkey and Jordan there is a group of nations attempting to influence who wins. The problem is that many of these outsiders are backing different forces which serve to extend the fighting possibly endlessly producing no winners, just increasing casualties in an endless procession. First we need to define the disparate groups and then find who is backing whom. The supposed home team definition would likely have to go the current President for life Bashir al-Assad and the Alawite tribe from which he comes. There are two sets that are considered rebel forces which sometimes cooperate and at other periods work either independently or actually impede each other. One rebel group consists mostly of members from the Muslim Brotherhood while the other consists of forces aligned with Jabhat al-Nusra which is the al-Qaeda terror group. Then there are two other groups which currently support Syrian President Bashir Assad but actually represent the Iranian interests and are likely to continue to engage in the war even after Assad collapses or is killed. These two groups are Hezballah, the terrorist group whose political wing currently leads the ruling coalition in Lebanon, and the IRGC, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, a group of fighters which make up a second military force roughly equivalent in size, equipment, training and capabilities to the Iranian Armed Forces used mostly to assist in foreign interventions, terrorist training internationally and domestically as required, and any other clandestine operations which may be assigned by the leadership of Iran. So, generally speaking there exist five groups vying to take control over all of Syria.

 

Oddly enough getting the teams all figured out who are operating within Syria is difficult enough, but trying to untangle the external interests and influences is far more complicated especially when dissecting their various motives. Let us first address the most up front, above board and obvious of the external influences. The most obvious is Turkey who is steadily supplying arms to both rebel forces for the most selfish of reasons, assuring their continued preeminence as the only stable rout for oil and gas pipelines. There is a further reason driving Turkey in providing arms for the rebel groups which is that there is no love lost between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Syria President Bashir Assad as both view themselves as a leader in some future Muslim Caliphate, Assad as leader of the Arab nations in an Iranian Caliphate and Erdogan as leader of a reborn Ottoman Caliphate. Add to this that as long as there exists some sustained level of violence which would discourage construction of new oil and gas routes through Syria then Turkey, with its already existent pipelines, would remain the uncontested and sole route of pipelines for oil and gas from the Arabian Peninsula and related reserves.

 

Another supplier of arms to one of the rebel forces is Saudi Arabia who is backing the Muslim Brotherhood aligned rebels. The Saudi interest is the opposite of Turkey as the Saudis would very much like to have an additional player supplying pipelines to the Mediterranean Sea and into Europe as competition would result in lower prices for them in transporting their oil and gas. Furthermore, the Saudis are rivals of the Iranians and thus would love to see Bashir Assad removed from ruling Syria thus breaking the Iranian crescent in which Syria is a vital link connecting Iran and Iraq through to Lebanon and the ports of the Mediterranean Sea. The Saudi Arabians are supported by the rest of the members of the GCC, Gulf Cooperation Council; whose members are of far less military capabilities thus the Saudis make all the decisions. The Saudis are also counting on support by the United States but they may run into some surprises in that relationship which we will cover later.

 

Then there are those exterior forces supporting the Syrian military and Syrian President Bashir Assad and at the same time defending the Iranian interests. These two groups are the IRGC and the Hezballah terror group. Should Bashir Assad fall either by fearing being taken by the rebel groups who would likely give him treatment similar to that used to dispatch Libyan Dictator Muammar Gaddafi, a rather unpleasant death, these two groups would simply continue the fight in support of their true masters, the Iranians. To either of these forces the continuance of Bashir Assad as the President of Syria is simply something that makes their presence in the fight more readily explainable. Remove Assad and their real motivations are revealed and Iran would be uncovered as the true force behind Assad remaining in power. Another nation supporting Bashir Assad, even if in a somewhat limited manner, is Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. Russia has thus far limited their support to continuing to fill all past weapons orders they have agreed to with Syria and are preventing any overt support for the rebels such as interventions or establishment of a no-fly zone by the United States or NATO. The most disturbing participation by the Russians is their intent to follow through with the sale and supply of their S-300 Anti-Aircraft Missile Systems which would make any Israeli strikes to prevent chemical weapons or other game-changing weapons from being transferred to the Hezballah forces in Lebanon for use against Israel in the future more hazardous. There is one potential future situation which would prove most intriguing, if President Assad should be killed or otherwise removed from the situation, would Russia continue their support giving the future weapons shipments to the IRGC and Hezballah or would their interest in the situation in Syria be terminated.

 

And then there is the most troubling foreign influence, and that is the United States and President Obama. The obvious interpretation of the United States interests is that they are aligned with Saudi Arabia and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and against the entirety of other forces. This façade also has another participant, Turkey, who also appears to work with the Saudis while also passing weapons to their intended recipient without question. Some of these weapons are intended for Jabhat al-Nusra as they are supplied from the al-Qaeda forces and influences who were involved in Libya. There have been rumors that the truth behind the catastrophe in Benghazi may have been related to attempts to prevent powerful and game-changing weapons, possibly stinger missiles, from being sent from Libya to undesirable recipients. Even if such a proposition were true, that is one truth that will never see the light of day. As is said, some secrets are secrets for a very good reason and as such must remain nothing more than a rumor, a whisper in the tempest and nothing more.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Turkey’s Erdogan and Russia’s Putin Ignore Obama’s Requests

The initial repercussions to President Obama dithering and retreating from enforcing his Syrian chemical weapons use “red line” have begun and the ramifications are far more damaging to world peace and security than anything that Syria’s Civil War could ever produce. The initial shot across the bow came from Turkey where Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated, “According to my plan, most probably I would be visiting Gaza in June.” Erdogan added referring to his intents to visit both Hamas leadership in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, “I place a lot of significance on this visit in terms of peace in the Middle East. I’m hoping that that visit will contribute to unity in Palestine.”

 

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki responded to the news declaring that, “As we’ve said consistently, we oppose engagement with Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization which remains a destabilizing force in Gaza and the region. We urge all parties who share our interest in the creation of a Palestinian state to take steps that promote the resumption of peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel.” Additionally, Secretary of State John Kerry commented during his visit to Turkey that Prime Minister Erdogan’s trip to Gaza would be “better delayed” waiting until the time when the “right circumstances” existed. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan struck back indignantly stating in response to Secretary Kerry’s impositions that “we wish he had not said that.”

 

Now the United States and the Obama Administration are facing a situation of explaining to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu exactly what he gained and where were the promised reconciliations with Turkey that President Obama had implied as a promise should Israel apologize. The Israeli-Turkish relations remain in a deep freeze with the charges and other legal actions by Turkish citizens and government agencies proceeding apace despite the humbling position Netanyahu was forced into taking at the close of President Obama’s visit, the visit where the President had promised there would be no surprises. The result is a slightly weakened Israel who now has been forced into a submissive position with Turkey and appearing weaker to the entire run of nations in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim World. The full ramifications of President Obama’s miscalculations and consistent demands on Israel along with his weakness showed Syria and his apparent subservience to the Muslim Brotherhood as he supports their rise to power resultant from the Arab Winter, Obama’s Arab Spring.

 

On another front which also has ramifications in Syria and throughout the Middle East comes from Russia. Despite the ramifications presented to Russian President Vladimir Putin by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on a recent visit in Moscow which advised that the selling of the anti-aircraft S-300 advanced missile systems to Syria thus changing dramatically the balance of power in the Middle East, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in an interview with Lebanese-based Al-Mayadeen television, the Russian government “committed to the agreements” signed with Syria regarding the advanced missiles and will “fully carry them out.” Lavrov further explained, “We have no intention of breaking international law. However, we do not want our reputation as reliable suppliers of weapons to be affected.” These statements came two days after Prime Minister Netanyahu’s visit leaving no doubt whether the ramifications and effects on Israel were known and able to be part of the equation.

 

Further comments on what other driving influences were behind the Russian’s decision were recently provided by Russian parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee Alexei Pushkov. His supplementary information paints a troubling picture of the credibility possessed by President Obama and on his ability to influence anything concerning world affairs. Alexei Pushkov was quoted to say, “We’re opposed to no-fly zones, because they are the first step toward aerial attack. Syria asked Russia to help it defend itself from aerial assault.” He also went further in explaining that Russia’s decision to send S-300 missile systems to Syria is, in part, a message to the United States. A more forceful message was also made with the deployment of at least twelve warships to patrol near a Russian Navy base in Syria. This was likely to be a message to all parties including NATO members and Israel not to interfere in Syria as Russia will act to defend their interests.

 

Both of these situations cast strong aspersions on the ability of President Obama to apply pressure or power in any situation anywhere in the world. This is an obvious reaction to President Obama’s timidity concerning the reported use by Syrian troops’ use of chemical weapons. The rules of unintended consequences applies to these actions which were primarily resultant of President Obama’s inept mishandling over the Syrian red line threat yet Israel will also pay a hard price as well. Reinforcing these feelings were also the well documented examples of his slow and tepid response to any military situation. These include but are not limited to President Obama taking months to approve the mission against Osama bin Laden after he was advised that all was prepared and certainty of success was extremely high, his complete lack of concern in addressing the situation in Benghazi where the American Ambassador to Libya Stevens and three others were murdered when had immediate actions been taken or even proper security increased in a timely manner after receiving requests for more readiness, and the President dithering and almost losing the opportunity to interdict Somali pirates holding American hostages. One more item which has the potential to have devastating consequences is the Iranian drive for nuclear weapons. How is it possible for any world leader concerned over the Iranian nuclear program take seriously President Obama’s promise that he will act if such becomes necessary. He did not act in Benghazi, nor did he act after the Syrian use of chemical weapons, he took close to six months to pull the trigger on the Osama bin Laden raid, so how could anyone expect a timely response to prevent the Iranians from attaining not just one nuclear device but tens or even hundreds of such devices before President Obama even begins to consider acting. This threat does not only pose a large problem for Israel as it also has serious ramifications for Saudi Arabia and the other members of the GCC as well as Europe, though the Europeans have blinders on and refuse to even notice any threat. The world is facing the same type of threats that were evident towards the end of President Carter’s term in office with the Iranian Hostage Crisis, a Middle East on fire, and a Soviet threat spreading throughout much of the planet. The main difference is we will have four full years of these ramifications and not just ten to fifteen months as was the case with Jimmy Carter. President Obama will very likely fulfill the prediction some who were at the time dismissed as alarmist pessimists when claiming that he would be another President Carter except on steroids. If even the slightest possibility exists that such may prove true, that should scare the life out of anybody, it sure does many of us here at BTC.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Netanyahu Apology to Turkey

The last action by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu topping off United States President Obama’s visit was facilitated by the President who made the phone call to Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan and gave an introductory preface for Netanyahu’s apology over the Mavi Marmara interception during which IDF Naval commandos came under attack by IHH terrorists causing a firefight which resulted in nine IHH members deaths, eight of which were Turkish citizens and one was an American citizen. Prime Minister Netanyahu made his apology and promised to make compensatory payments to the next of kin of those who died during the confrontation. The entire confrontation was an effort by the IHH group with the cooperation of members of the Turkish government to break the internationally recognized naval blockade by Israel on ships wishing to carry cargo in or out of the Gaza Strip in order to prevent the transfer of arms or terrorists with Hamas and the other terrorist groups operating in the Gaza Strip. The Israeli blockade is recognized and has been determined to be legal and meeting all the requirements imposed by international law and has been approved by the United Nations. The blockade requires that ships unload their Gaza Strip bound cargoes at an Israeli port where the contents are examined for contraband and all which is not on the prohibited list of goods are then transferred into the Gaza Strip via recognized land crossing along with the regular daily shipments of aid provided by Israel.

The Mavi Marmara was the sole ship from the flotilla which refused to divert to the Israeli port and instead attempted to break the blockade. The goods on the other ships was inspected and transferred into the Gaza Strip where it sat until removed as the out of date foodstuffs and medicines were of no interest to Hamas or the people residing in the Gaza Strip as they receive sufficient supplies of fresh food and medical supplies as part of the support provided via Israeli truck transfers. The Mavi Marmara contained no supplies whatsoever and was solely intended to force a confrontation for the sake of propaganda against Israel and providing news footage which would show the IDF forces as being needlessly violent and using undue force against the IHH mercenaries who were to be portrayed as innocent, nonviolent human rights activists. Their plan was foiled as footage of the confrontation revealed the violence which was unleashed upon the Israeli soldiers as they rappelled onto the Mavi Marmara’s decks. They were set upon by terrorists wielding baseball bats, iron rods, knives and swords. The Israeli commandos were armed with paintball guns filled with pepper-ball ammunition and were forced to turn to their sidearms in self-defense. The result of the attacks was nine IHH members died and several IDF soldiers were hospitalized with at least one permanently disabled. The IHH members were recorded claiming their desire to either break the blockade or die as shahids, martyrs. There were miscalculations and planning errors made by the Israeli commanders who apparently thought that the flotilla was a protest stand and not a military operation intent on confrontation and possibly killing the IDF soldiers. The Mavi Marmara did not carry aid of any sort and was being utilized purely for the confrontation with intent on causing as much violence as they potentially were able. As to which side was at greater fault is dependent upon the person asked and needless to point out is that the Turkish government and many leaders blame Israel for using disproportional force and murdering the nine IHH members and the Israelis point to the film of the confrontation which shows the overt and potentially lethal force unleashed on the IDF soldiers as they boarded the Mavi Marmara and claims their actions were purely self-defense and completely legal.

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan insisted that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu make a formal apology and pay compensation to the families of the nine dead IHH members. Prime Minister Netanyahu refused to apologize and held fast to that position until he finally capitulated to President Obama’s demands onboard Air Force One under the coxing of United States President Obama. Even with the apology and offer of payment to the families, Prime Minister Netanyahu had not entirely surrendered and Prime Minister Erdogan had also compromised by accepting a phone call apology instead of a formal apology. The apology by Prime Minister Netanyahu has caused a fair amount of controversy in Israel with the divide along the lines one might expect with a few exceptions. Former Foreign Minister Lieberman made the first and likely most boisterous condemnation claiming that Israel should not be seen to grovel over defending herself. Minister of the Knesset Chetboun also objected claiming that the apology conveyed a message to IDF soldiers that the government does not have their backs in such situations and confrontations when facing violent terrorists. Meanwhile, Tzipi Livni and Shelly Yachimovich both supported Prime Minister Netanyahu making the apology claiming that good relations with Turkey outweigh pride and was the expedient thing to do. The question is whether or not the apology will return relations between Israel and Turkey to be as they were before the Mavi Marmara incident or if the relations have deteriorated too far already and if so why and at whose initiative?

There will be many who will propose that things between Turkey and Israel are on the mend and will point mainly to trade or anything else that they can show which supports such a claim. Tourism might even revive with time but the real signs that relations are improved would be on the political and military relations. Since the Mavi Marmara confrontation, Israel and Turkey have not had any further joint military exercises with Turkey insisting Israel not be included in what had previously been joint exercises the two nations and the United States and NATO. Those who will use trade as their proof are pointing to one aspect of Turkish-Israeli relations which had not suffered any real measurable amount as that was one area which remained healthy except for the military sectors. Most of the military trade between Israel and Turkey consisted of Israeli systems traded to Turkey which were curtailed as part of the freeze which had set in. The break began when Turkey cancelled all outstanding orders for Israeli military systems. Should this sector of trade resume it may be a sign of a return to healthy and friendly relations.

Turkey is currently in a state of siege with half a million Syrian refugees and a full blown civil war on their southern border. Adding to this is the undeniable fact that Iraq has sided with Iran and has been facilitating the Iranian supplying of Syrian dictator Bashir Assad’s forces including sending IRGC troops to fight against the rebels. They are also going to need to deal with what is essentially a Kurdish state on their eastern borders. Turkey will bear watching in the immediate future to discern which direction Prime Minister Erdogan will lead his country. Should he continue in the path he has been following the world will watch as Turkey slides closer to the Muslim world and discards their secular history returning to their Islamic past. Erdogan has wisely moved slowly initially, almost unperceptively, undoing everything that was built through the changes brought be Kemal Atatürk. We had discussed the trend towards Islamist principles and their trending away from Western culture and warned of the growing threat Turkey was going to pose for NATO on January 15, 2010, in an article titled <a href=http://beyondthecusp.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/the-turkey-problem-for-nato/>The Turkey Problem for NATO</a> and earlier noted the slide towards Islam as part of an article titled <a href=http://beyondthecusp.wordpress.com/2007/06/21/is-turkey-at-the-tipping-point/>Is Turkey at the Tipping Point?</a> back on June 21, 2007. Unfortunately most of the Western nations have blithely been ignoring all the signs right before their eyes and continue to ploy Turkey with arms and favorable treatment. But then again, if the recent deals made to arm Egypt and Saudi Arabia is any sign, the Western nations are blithely ignoring every warning sign. It is due to this limitation in foresight that it will be claimed that Israel and Turkey are friends once more and anything which can be attributed to that end will be applauded and touted as a great achievement. Hopefully, at least some in the Israeli leadership will not be blinded to the truth and will advise a cautionary approach in relations and trust towards Turkey. A little caution is always advisable and even more so when dealing with new friend, or as in this case a renewed friend. Israel should not be too quick to forget the bad blood that has come between them and Turkey or to forget and forgive that the Turkish government supported and assisted the IHH terrorists with their flotilla. Israel should not believe that they had no knowledge of the planned violence by the IHH members even though this will be exactly what the world will demand of Israel.

Beyond the Cusp