|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On December 15 2016 18:06 Wrath wrote:Show nested quote +It seems to me like this shiite vs sunni stuff is being exploited by states, warlords, kings, corporations and all that.
True, this is even a better explanation than the one I provided. At the end, it does not matter who wins, it is the interests that we care for. Even more interesting point is that the arming and funding of the Sunni side is not a serious one. The Sunni side lacks anti air support and at some point during 2013/2014, the regime had small to none land control and all he had is air strikes. If Rebels / Sunnis received anti air weapons, this war would have been over years ago. because there are rules and the rules state that Assad was and is the legal ruler of Syria and as such he can ask help from other countries. he asked Russia. the arming of revolutionaries was and is illegal under international law/agreements.
Edit: maybe i should've used legitimacy somewhere in there but the argument still stands.
|
People seem to forget that there are still Sunnis in the Syrian Army...
|
Shitty people are in power, but if you topple those shit-heads worse shit-heads replace them. Have none of you learned this yet? How many times do you have to beat people over the head with Libya and Iraq (and Egypt ain't looking too much better these days)? It's none of our business anyways, but Syria is one of the few countries who refuse the petrodollar so of course the US is involved. It's also the reason for the sabre-rattling against Iran.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
I remember how bad of a shithead Gadaffi was. Not someone I would defend in any case, and he had a long and consistent history of being nothing short of terrible. Yet it's clear that Libya isn't better off for his ouster given how it descended into a black hole and a jihadist hotbed.
|
On December 16 2016 06:45 Wegandi wrote: Shitty people are in power, but if you topple those shit-heads worse shit-heads replace them. Have none of you learned this yet? How many times do you have to beat people over the head with Libya and Iraq (and Egypt ain't looking too much better these days)? It's none of our business anyways, but Syria is one of the few countries who refuse the petrodollar so of course the US is involved. It's also the reason for the sabre-rattling against Iran. Well, there's always Tunisia.
|
a decent article on things http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-no-military-solution-syria-russia-tells-assad-370256417 MOSCOW – Russia has told Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that there is no "military solution" to the country's conflict, despite pro-government forces claiming victory over rebels in eastern Aleppo, according to a key Russian adviser to the United Nations' Syria envoy.
In an exclusive interview with Middle East Eye, Professor Vitaly Naumkin, the president of the Moscow-based Institute of Oriental Studies, said that Russia would continue to press Assad to accept a coalition government that would include members of the opposition. He did not specify which "opposition" groups he was referring to.
He also said he believed that Assad was more likely to make concessions at the next round of peace talks as a result of the recapture of formerly rebel-held territory in Syria’s largest city.
"I hope Assad will not be reluctant but more responsive to pressure from his own constituency, from the people of Syria who are divided - there are a lot of loyalists and there are opponents - as well as more responsive to the pressures of his partners and accept a political process," Naumkin told MEE.
Naumkin is one of four senior political advisers to UN envoy Staffan de Mistura, who has been trying to mediate between the war's many players since July 2014. ...
He rejected the view, suggested by some analysts, that the pro-government forces' victory over rebel forces in eastern Aleppo would harden Assad’s position and tempt him to try to retake every area held by opposition fighters.
"On the contrary," he said. "First of all, Assad is obliged to his partners, including Russia which has been supporting him in his victory.
"Number two: In my view he understands that without some reforms and without some change, he cannot succeed in establishing control over the whole country and hold it and neutralise the opposition. So he has to make concessions. Russia is telling him that there is no military solution."
After the recapture by pro-government forces of eastern Aleppo, the main task now was to move towards direct talks without preconditions in Geneva between Assad's representatives and the opposition, Naumkin said.
Two earlier rounds of "proximity" talks, in which mediators met the rival delegations separately, had made no progress after the Western- and Saudi-backed High Negotiating Council had insisted on Assad's resignation.
"The HNC was a spoiler," Naumkin told MEE. "Their role was to spoil any talks until [Hillary] Clinton came in and armed [the rebels] with sophisticated weapons."
Clinton, the former US secretary of state, was defeated by Donald Trump in last month's US presidental election.
This was positive, Naumkin said, "if he [Trump] sticks to his campaign promises to improve relations with Russia and consider fighting terrorism, including in Syria, as his main file".
"There is some hope that Trump will be active in pressing the opposition to join negotiations with the government without preconditions."
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
When was the last time that "arming the opposition" led to anything other than proliferation of terrorism? Why would Clinton consider it to be a good idea?
|
On December 18 2016 00:12 xM(Z wrote:a decent article on things http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-no-military-solution-syria-russia-tells-assad-370256417 Show nested quote +MOSCOW – Russia has told Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that there is no "military solution" to the country's conflict, despite pro-government forces claiming victory over rebels in eastern Aleppo, according to a key Russian adviser to the United Nations' Syria envoy.
In an exclusive interview with Middle East Eye, Professor Vitaly Naumkin, the president of the Moscow-based Institute of Oriental Studies, said that Russia would continue to press Assad to accept a coalition government that would include members of the opposition. He did not specify which "opposition" groups he was referring to.
He also said he believed that Assad was more likely to make concessions at the next round of peace talks as a result of the recapture of formerly rebel-held territory in Syria’s largest city.
"I hope Assad will not be reluctant but more responsive to pressure from his own constituency, from the people of Syria who are divided - there are a lot of loyalists and there are opponents - as well as more responsive to the pressures of his partners and accept a political process," Naumkin told MEE.
Naumkin is one of four senior political advisers to UN envoy Staffan de Mistura, who has been trying to mediate between the war's many players since July 2014. ...
He rejected the view, suggested by some analysts, that the pro-government forces' victory over rebel forces in eastern Aleppo would harden Assad’s position and tempt him to try to retake every area held by opposition fighters.
"On the contrary," he said. "First of all, Assad is obliged to his partners, including Russia which has been supporting him in his victory.
"Number two: In my view he understands that without some reforms and without some change, he cannot succeed in establishing control over the whole country and hold it and neutralise the opposition. So he has to make concessions. Russia is telling him that there is no military solution."
After the recapture by pro-government forces of eastern Aleppo, the main task now was to move towards direct talks without preconditions in Geneva between Assad's representatives and the opposition, Naumkin said.
Two earlier rounds of "proximity" talks, in which mediators met the rival delegations separately, had made no progress after the Western- and Saudi-backed High Negotiating Council had insisted on Assad's resignation.
"The HNC was a spoiler," Naumkin told MEE. "Their role was to spoil any talks until [Hillary] Clinton came in and armed [the rebels] with sophisticated weapons."
Clinton, the former US secretary of state, was defeated by Donald Trump in last month's US presidental election.
This was positive, Naumkin said, "if he [Trump] sticks to his campaign promises to improve relations with Russia and consider fighting terrorism, including in Syria, as his main file".
"There is some hope that Trump will be active in pressing the opposition to join negotiations with the government without preconditions."
I hope Assad takes in progressives from the opposition rather than bringing in the straight up terrorists. Cause the other members of the opposition, I doubt they'd bring anything but hell to the people of Syria and they've suffered enough already.
Maybe it's bit dumb to think this way but I do hope "opposition" means anybody other than Assad and not who I think they mean.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
Article from Jerusalem Post, since deleted, concerning how Hezbollah cooperation with Assad, Russia, and Iran in Syria has made it a stronger military.
Hezbollah has suffered several setbacks since it began its involvement in the Syrian war— around 1,300 have been killed and thousands injured, it has had to cut back on social services it provides to its constituency and had to resort to recruiting teenagers for the fight in Syria. However, the Syrian civil war, especially the recent Russian involvement is also helping enhance the group’s fighting capabilities which is likely to have significant political and security implications in Lebanon and beyond.
Hezbollah has proven to be a forward-thinking and malleable fighting force. In 2012, when the group began to engage more robustly in Syria, it quickly learned that its defensive tactics were not applicable to the fight. Instead of a modern Israeli army, Hezbollah faced an insurgency. These rebel groups applied similar tactics to Hezbollah’s against regime soldiers and further benefited from local knowledge of the terrain in areas crucial to Bashar al-Assad’s survival. For instance, during the capture of Qusayr in 2013 Hezbollah reportedly lost around one-tenth of its fighters, with estimates ranging from 70 to 120 dead and 200 wounded, up to two dozen of whom were killed in a rebel ambush on the first day of that offensive; what Hezbollah leaders thought would be a quick victory instead turned into a drawn-out fight. Fast-forwarding to 2016, Hezbollah has refined its offensive capabilities and—under the cover of a new powerful ally, Russia—continued to help the Syrian regime take back crucial territory with lower casualty rates.
In September 2015, the Russian military entered the conflict in support of Assad, reversing the course of the war. Having suffered heavy losses, including in the city of Idlib, it seemed it was but a matter of time before the regime collapsed. But beginning in January 2016, the Syrian regime, Hezbollah, other Iranian proxy groups, and the Russian military have dealt a series of crushing blows to the country’s myriad of rebel groups. On January 12, Hezbollah and regime forces, backed by the Russian air force and artillery, captured the town of Salma, the last rebel bastion in Latakia governorate and which had threatened the regime’s coastal enclave. This was followed by the capture of the town of Sheikh Miskeen in Daraa on January 26, reportedly by regime fighters, Hezbollah, and Russian special forces. This split rebel holdings in Daraa into eastern and western pockets and cut them off from rebel-held areas in Damascus. The biggest coup by this combined force came on February 4, when Hezbollah and Iranian-backed militias under the cover of Russian airstrikes broke the siege of Nubl and Zahraa. The predominantly Shia towns had been surrounded by rebel forces for three years, and in the process pro-regime forces cut their primary supply route linking Aleppo and the Turkish border. It is now likely that these forces will surround and attempt to starve out rebels in Aleppo, Syria’s largest city.
These victories make it apparent that the combination of regime irregulars, foreign militias, Hezbollah fighters, and crushing Russian bombardment has been a winning one in Syria. They have also had significant impact on Hezbollah’s fighting capabilities. While Hezbollah commanders have claimed to have received advanced weaponry from Russia, such assertions are hard to verify and have been disputed by Western officials and analysts, who believe that Moscow would not want to threaten its relationship with Hezbollah’s main enemy, Israel. It is more likely that the group is learning how a world-class army gathers intelligence, makes plans, and executes operations. Working side-by-side with Russian officers is sure to refine Hezbollah’s modern military strategy, and reports indicate that there are at least two joint Russia–Hezbollah operation rooms in Latakia and Damascus. With an estimated 6,000 to 8,000 Hezbollah fighters in Syria and Iraq, the exposure and experience is likely to trickle down to individual fighters.
Other experts have pointed out that Hezbollah will likely learn better surveillance and reconnaissance skills, employ special operations tactics, and learn more about upgraded equipment they will want to use in the future. This would better enable them to detect enemy forces, execute misinformation campaigns, analyze imagery intelligence, and make appropriate use of drones in the lead up to and execution of military operations.
The latter is quite important, as Hezbollah has built a drone airstrip in the Bekaa Valley and has employed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) over Syria to provide aerial reconnaissance and targeting information for its forces on the ground. These eyes in the sky have proven useful in the battle for the Qalamoun Mountains that straddle the Lebanese–Syrian border, where the group has helped the Syrian army surround Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State, and could be employed in future conflict with Israel.
The Israel Defense Forces estimate that Russia’s interaction with Hezbollah decreases the latter’s likelihood of war with Israel in the near future, figuring that Russia’s dialogue with the group is likely to restrain its response to perceived Israeli airstrikes at a time that Hezbollah is playing a crucial role in the Syrian regime’s advance. Furthermore, the Israeli army also views claims that the Russians are arming Hezbollah as baseless. Yet the longer-term impact of Hezbollah’s interaction with the Russian military is more worrying. A newly offense-minded Hezbollah, capable of more complex operations, could deal heavier blows to the Israeli army in a confrontation along the southern Lebanese border. It may even attempt to enter Israeli territory, as Hamas did in the 2014 conflict, albeit in a more capable manner.
Inside Lebanon, Hezbollah’s enhanced capabilities will ensure that the group continues to have a comparative military advantage vis-à-vis the Lebanese army, which has just had a $3 billion aid package suspended by Saudi Arabia. Improved tactics and diminished support to the national army will likely support Hezbollah’s argument that it is the only force capable of defending Lebanon from Israeli aggression and the radical Sunni threat. Already bolstered politically by the survival of the Syrian regime and the success of its own efforts in Syria—the continuation of which is thanks to Russian military support—the group will further push its agenda on crucial decisions regarding the Lebanese presidency, changes to parliamentary election practices, and security appointments. Hezbollah’s Russia education may stop with the end of the conflict in Syria, but its impact will continue to reverberate in Lebanon and the region. Source (use Google cache)
|
Ugh, before I bother reading it: why was it deleted? Heh. If its bullshit...
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
No idea. It's just gone, but it is decent reading if you want to look into an Israeli perspective into security concerns here.
|
Seems like we can soon expect more headlines along the lines of "Obama's drone war is backfiring" or maybe people will pin it on Trump. Makes sense I guess: why kill yourself in a suicide attack when you can just use drones.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
France struck a compromise Sunday with Russia on a U.N. resolution that it said would prevent "mass atrocities" in besieged areas of Aleppo, where thousands of trapped civilians and rebel fighters await evacuation in freezing temperatures.
On the ground, prospects for swift evacuations from Aleppo and other besieged areas were thrown into doubt again Sunday after militants burned buses assigned to the rescue operation, although one convoy of five buses was reported to have reached safety from the city late Sunday.
The Aleppo evacuations were to have been part of a wider deal that would simultaneously allow more than 2,000 sick and wounded people to leave two pro-government villages that have been besieged by Syrian rebels. Most villagers are Shiite Muslims, while most rebels are Sunni Muslims.
Six buses that were among those poised to enter the villages of Foua and Kfarya on Sunday were set on fire by unidentified militants, presumably to scuttle any deal.
A video posted online showed armed men near the burning buses as celebratory gunshots rang out. "The buses that came to evacuate the apostates have been burned," the narrator of the video said. He warned that no "Shiite pigs" would be allowed to leave the towns.
The video could not be verified independently, but was in line with Associated Press reporting from the area.
Earlier Sunday, pro-Syrian government TV stations showed dozens of buses on stand-by at a crossing near eastern Aleppo, reportedly poised to resume evacuations from the opposition's last foothold in the city.
Later, a Syrian opposition war monitoring group said the first civilians and fighters to evacuate eastern Aleppo in over 48 hours arrived safely in the countryside from the city. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said shortly before midnight Sunday that government forces allowed five buses to leave Aleppo.
Evacuations were suspended two days earlier amid mutual recriminations after several thousand people had been ferried out of the war zone. Thousands more desperate civilians are believed trapped in the city.
About 2,700 children were evacuated in the first rescue mission earlier this week, but hundreds more "are now waiting in freezing temperatures, close to the front lines," said Shushan Mebrahtu of the U.N. agency for children, UNICEF. "We are deeply worried."
The troubled evacuations are throwing into disarray an Aleppo deal that was brokered last week by Syria ally Russia and opposition supporter Turkey.
The deal marked a turning point in the country's civil war. With the opposition leaving Aleppo, Syrian President Bashar Assad has effectively reasserted his control over Syria's five largest cities and its Mediterranean coast nearly six years after a national movement to unseat him took hold.
At the United Nations, France and Russia announced agreement on a compromise U.N. resolution to deploy U.N. monitors to eastern Aleppo to ensure safe evacuations and immediate delivery of humanitarian aid.
France's U.N. ambassador, Francois Delattre, told reporters the compromise was reached after more than three hours of closed consultations on Sunday and the Security Council would vote on the resolution at 9 a.m. EST on Monday.
He said some countries want to report to their capitals overnight. He said he hoped for a positive vote, but that he remained cautious.
Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, told reporters before consultations that Moscow could not accept the French draft resolution unless it was changed. He presented council members with a rival text.
After the consultations, Churkin said a "good text" had been formulated.
The U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Samantha Power, said the resolution would quickly put more than 100 U.N. personnel on the ground to monitor evacuations. "The text contains all the elements for safe, secure, dignified evacuation, for humanitarian access to those who choose to remain in eastern Aleppo" and for protecting civilians, she said.
She said that following the siege in eastern Aleppo, there have been "many, many reports of people being pulled off buses and disappeared, whether into conscription or into torture chambers or killed outright." Deploying U.N. monitors would deter "some of the worst excesses," she said.
Delattre agreed. Approval of the resolution, he said, "would give us collectively the tools to avoid ... a situation in which, after the end of major military operations, forces including militias, would commit mass atrocities."
He said the resolution could also offer leverage to negotiate a broader cease-fire. Source
|
what could come next https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-21/putin-promotes-libyan-strongman-as-new-ally-after-syria-victory Flush with success in supporting his ally in Syria, Vladimir Putin has a new ambition: supporting another one, this time in Libya. The effort is beginning to undermine the UN-backed government there.
Russian President Putin’s government is befriending a powerful military leader, Khalifa Haftar, who now controls more territory than any other faction in the tumultuous, oil-rich North African state. In two visits to Moscow in the past half-year, Haftar met the defense and foreign ministers, plus the national-security chief, to seek support. A top ally also visited last week and Russia is supplying funds and military expertise to Haftar’s base in the east.
“The longer we wait, the more likely it becomes that Haftar wins,” said Riccardo Fabiani, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at Eurasia Group in London. “It’s clear he’s getting military, financial and diplomatic support.”
By backing Haftar in his standoff with the government of Prime Minister Fayez al-Serraj in the west, Russia could bolster its role in the region and secure billions of dollars from Libya in arms and other contracts. At the same time, it also risks igniting more conflict in the divided country, where forces loyal to Haftar, as well as rival armed groups, are accused by the UN of human-rights abuses including torture and extra-judicial killings. ...
Libya, 5 Years After Qaddafi, Still Caught in Chaos: QuickTake
The U.S. and the European Union support the UN-endorsed government in Libya. State Department spokesman John Kirby on Nov. 29 called on Haftar and his forces to submit to “civilian command” of the Tripoli authorities.
Putin’s strategy could cement a new partnership with President-elect Donald Trump, should Moscow and Washington align in backing Haftar’s self-proclaimed fight against radical Islamic groups, according to Mattia Toalda, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Trump has waxed enthusiastic about Egypt’s El-Sisi and his proclaimed war on terror.
Haftar, 73, a one-time Qaddafi ally, received military training in the Soviet Union in the 1970s. He speaks good Russian, according to media reports in Moscow. He also lived for two decades in the U.S. after falling out with the Libyan leader, working with the CIA by keeping contact with anti-Qaddafi forces, according to Saudi-Arabia-owned Al Arabiya channel.
After returning from exile to fight with rebels during the revolution in 2011, Haftar set up his own power base. He announced a campaign to take control of most of the strategic city of Benghazi in 2014 and in September of this year seized most eastern oil installations.
“You have to work from reality -- the key here is military might and control of oil,” said Rafael Enikeev, head of Middle East studies at a Kremlin advisory group run by a former Foreign Intelligence Service general. “In such conditions, Haftar can dictate terms to Tripoli.”
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
Another anti-Islamist dictator to prop up? Sure.
Russian military doctrine discourages involvement in more than one major active conflict at a time which suggests that if they do intend to intervene in Libya, that they would have to be confident about Syria first. Which might be true in a few months but hardly seems to be true now.
|
or they think it's the same thing. same actors, same goal(energy sources/other interests); add to those the proximity of zones and it looks like a natural follow up.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
Russia will most likely wait until Syria looks manageable before active involvement elsewhere. Libya would be an interesting "fuck you" to American interventions in the Middle East if it works though.
Word on the grapevine is that Russia wants a base in Egypt, which could lead to Libya involvement.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
|
On December 16 2016 06:45 Wegandi wrote: Shitty people are in power, but if you topple those shit-heads worse shit-heads replace them. Have none of you learned this yet? How many times do you have to beat people over the head with Libya and Iraq (and Egypt ain't looking too much better these days)? It's none of our business anyways, but Syria is one of the few countries who refuse the petrodollar so of course the US is involved. It's also the reason for the sabre-rattling against Iran.
Its not to say that its impossible though. Its simply been managed very poorly. I hope this isn't a no true scotsman fallacy, but I'm pretty sure that if America was more actively involved in building a coalition government in Iraq that actually included the Sunni and Shia muslims in a cooperative framework, rather than letting a partisan leader slowly exile all members from the government who belonged to the other faction, then things probably would have worked out better, and its unlikely ISIS would have formed. There is some hand holding required, especially in these regions that have been ruled by strife for so long.
Anyway, there actually were "good" people fighting in Libya and Syria, people who genuinely wanted change towards democratic rights in the middle east. To the extent that they could form a clear group with identifiable objectives, I'm pretty sure that aiding them in victory would be better than being ruled over by a brutal dictator.
If you do nothing in the aftermath, of course it is very possible it will just remain in a state of lawless civil war with terrorist groups operating throughout the region.
But in certain cases, like Egypt, you're right. The Muslim Brotherhood is arguably a much worse replacement than what existed previously...and the biggest problem, is that the people wanted it. So what do you do? You can't do anything if the people themselves want to be ruled by religious dogma.
edit: Sad about Aleppo, but it was a losing war for a long time. Its probably better to live in peace now, even if under assad.
|
On December 23 2016 13:58 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2016 06:45 Wegandi wrote: Shitty people are in power, but if you topple those shit-heads worse shit-heads replace them. Have none of you learned this yet? How many times do you have to beat people over the head with Libya and Iraq (and Egypt ain't looking too much better these days)? It's none of our business anyways, but Syria is one of the few countries who refuse the petrodollar so of course the US is involved. It's also the reason for the sabre-rattling against Iran. Its not to say that its impossible though. Its simply been managed very poorly. I hope this isn't a no true scotsman fallacy, but I'm pretty sure that if America was more actively involved in building a coalition government in Iraq that actually included the Sunni and Shia muslims in a cooperative framework, rather than letting a partisan leader slowly exile all members from the government who belonged to the other faction, then things probably would have worked out better, and its unlikely ISIS would have formed. There is some hand holding required, especially in these regions that have been ruled by strife for so long.
Right, but the issue is sovereignty/democracy. If the US is actually letting them rule themselves, they will do what they do. If we take the power away from them, we're just imperialist colonizers. It wasn't really our fault that 60% of the population wanted to fuck 20% really badly. That's democracy. (Heck, it's not a bad description of US race relations.) It sucks, but you can't have an occupying power just say "No, that's not how you rule yourselves; do it this way."
|
|
|
|