Tag Archives: Assad

Putin Is Mediating A Secret Deal Between Assad And Netanyahu, Bombshell Report Reveals, by Tyler Durden

The deal is that Syria will reportedly accept a demilitarized zone around the Golan Heights if Israel will quit trying to depose Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

A bombshell report that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has threatened to attack all Iranian facilities and assets within 40 kilometers (25 miles) of Israel’s Golan Heights is circulating in Israeli media. The story, first picked up by The Jerusalem Post based on Israeli and Arab sources, also indicates that intense and potentially breakthrough back channel diplomacy between Assad and Netanyahu is currently being mediated via Vladimir Putin.

Though unconfirmed, what appears to be an ultimatum by Netanyahu could be the catalyst that finally pushes the Levant either toward broader war, or in the direction of de-escalation and regional stability after months of intensifying and provocative Israeli airstrikes on Syria and a corresponding war of words. The report also follows on the heels of a rare and unexpected visit of Assad to Sochi, Russia where he met with Putin just prior to trilateral talks between Russia, Iran, and Turkey over the future of Syria.


SAM defense system (Image Source: Iran Review)

Netanyahu himself recently met with Putin in a reportedly contentious summit in August where the Israeli prime minister declared, “We cannot forget for a single minute that Iran threatens every day to annihilate Israel. Israel opposes Iran’s continued entrenchment in Syria. We will be sure to defend ourselves with all means against this and any threat.”

And now after months of Israel issuing threats of “red lines” concerning Iranian troop and militia presence in Syria, The Jerusalem Post reveals the following:

Kuwaiti newspaper Al Jarida revealed on Sunday that an Israeli source disclosed a promise from Jerusalem to destroy all Iranian facilities within 40 kilometers (25 miles) of Israel’s Golan Heights.

The source, who remains unnamed, said that during Syrian President Bashar Assad’s surprise visit to Russia last week, Assad gave Russian Premier Vladimir Putin a message for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: Damascus will agree to a demilitarized zone of up to 40 kilometers from the border in the Golan Heights as part of a comprehensive agreement between the two countries, but only if Israel does not work to remove Assad’s regime from power.

To continue reading: Putin Is Mediating A Secret Deal Between Assad And Netanyahu, Bombshell Report Reveals

Nassim Taleb: The Syrian War Condensed (For Almost Dummies)

Nassim Taleb, author of The Black Swan, determines the lesser of two evils in Syria. From Talem, at Medium.com via theburningplatform.com:

Juxtaposition. The way to analyze the situation is to look at the factions comparatively. You do not compare Assad’s regime to the Danish or Norwegian governments, but to the alternative. The question becomes if there is anything in the left column that is worse than the right column?

Note 1. Assad father’s operatives blew up my house in Amioun when my grandfather, then MP, voted for Bashir. In Skin in the Game I discuss this as “acting against one’s interest” (the opposite of conflict of interest). So as a scientist and a humanist, I have been setting my grudge aside in considering the far, far, far, greater cancer of Salafism or Islamofascism.

Note 2. Recall that I am a statistician. When I took a look at the statistics of the conflicts, most appear to be fabrications inflated by Qatari-funded think tanks and their useful idiots — by a mechanism the Indians call “Salma told Sabrina”. For instance, we know that Hama’s toll was not the 30–40,000 people report but the only real evidence is closer to 2,000.

Note 3. One may ask: are the “rebels” all theocratic Salafis? No, but the groups became progressively so by the minority rule: you put a single Salafi in a group of five, and the five behave as Salafis. This, aside from Wahabi funding.

Note 4. Counter-insurgencies (Army vs insurgents/terrorists, etc.) command a much higher rate of civilian casualties regardless of whether the army belongs to a liberal democracy or an autocracy.

Note 5. One may ask: are all people who are mourning the defeat of the rebels in Aleppo that stupid, so gullible to the think tank operators? My answer, alas, is yes. And it takes some financial and intellectual independence and a great deal of integrity to analyze matters outside the main narrative as think tankers jump on you like flies.

In the end I never imagined seeing the “left” siding with the AlQaeda of Sept 11, mourning the fighters of Aleppo and, aside from such independent journalists as Robert Fisk, spreading all manner of concoctions.

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2016/12/15/nassim-taleb-the-syrian-war-condensed-for-almost-dummies/

A Useful Prep-Sheet on Syria for Media Propagandists, by Gary Leupp

The “Lies, Damnable Lies, and Syria,” keep piling up, and you wonder how the talking heads in the mainstream media can keep a straight face. From Gary Leupp, on a guest post at the burningplatform.com:

Here are some State Department talking points on Syria for cable news anchors:

1) Keep mentioning the barrel bombs. Do not mention how their use was pioneered by the Israeli Air Force in 1948, and how they were used by the US Air Force in Vietnam in Operation Inferno in 1968. Keep repeating, “barrel bombs, barrel bombs” and stating with a straight face that the Syrian regime is using them “against its own people.” Against its own people. Against its own people. Against its own people.

2) Keep mentioning “200,000.” (The UN estimates that 220,000 have been killed in the conflict since 2011.) Declare like you really believe it that this is the number of civilians the Syrian government of Bashar Assad has killed during the war. (Do not be concerned about any need to back the figure up. No one is ever going to call you on it publicly.)

Do NOT mention that around half of the war dead (estimates range from 84,000 to 133,000) are Syrian government forces waging war against an overwhelmingly Islamist opposition, and an additional 73,000 to 114,000 are anti-government combatants.

Do not discuss these figures because they would call into question the claim that the Syrian government is targeting and killing tens of thousands of civilians willy-nilly. (If feeling any qualms of conscience, recall Karl Rove’s immortal dictum that “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.”)

3) Keep mentioning the “Arab Spring” and how in 2011 Syrians peacefully mobilized to challenge the regime were violently repressed. But don’t dwell on the Arab Spring too much. Realize that the State Department was actually shocked by it, particularly by its repercussions in Egypt, where democratization brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power before the US-backed military drowned its opponents in blood.

And recall but do NOT mention how in Bahrain, peaceful demonstrations by the majority Shiites against the repressive Sunni monarchy were crushed by a Saudi-led invasion force tacitly supported by the US. And NEVER mention that the bulk of the peaceful protesters in the Syrian Arab Spring want nothing to do with the US-supported armed opposition but are instead receptive to calls from Damascus, Moscow, and Tehran for dialogue towards a power-sharing arrangement.

Do NOT explain that the pro-democracy student activists and their allies fear most is the radical Islamists who have burgeoned in large part due to foreign intervention since 2011.

4) Keep mentioning the “Free Syrian Army” and the “moderate opposition” to give the impression that they actually exist in the real world.

Do NOT point out that the FSA organization is actually a joke; that its leaders live in Turkey; that its remaining units are headed by CIA officers; that US efforts to train over 5,000 FSA troops have been an utter failure; that the tiny group of 54 recently sent to the front were immediately captured by the al-Nusra Front and another 70 dispatched from Turkey immediately turned over their arms to that al-Qaeda-linked group; that their chief of staff has resigned protesting US incompetence; that Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, the top American commander in the Middle East, told Congress last month that only “four or five” Syrians had been trained by the US to fight ISIL; and that the US-trained forces have been accused of multiple human rights abuses.

Do NOT mention these things. They are so totally embarrassing that the State Department officials responsible just want to curl up into a ball and roll into a corner. Your mission is to put a bright face on this and continue to pretend there’s something in Syria, supported by the US, that falls between the terrorists and the Assad regime.

To continue reading: A Useful Prep-Sheet on Syria for Media Propagandists

He Said That? 5/24/15

From President Barack Obama:

“No, I don’t think we’re losing.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/05/obama-interview-iran-isis-israel/393782/

That was Obama’s response to a question about whether the US was losing the fight against the Islamic State. That assumes that what the US is doing in Syria and Iraq is so clear-cut as fighting somebody. The US doesn’t like Syria’s leader, bad guy Bashar al-Assad. The IS is fighting Assad, which is good. However, the US doesn’t like the bad guys IS, which it has labeled a terrorist group. Assad is fighting the IS, which is also good. So two entities we don’t like are fighting each other. How do you even define winning and losing from the US perspective? Obama’s statement would be just as correct, or incorrect, if he had said: “No, I don’t think we’re winning,” which simply illustrates the absurdity of current US Middle East policy. The question presupposed that there is an outcome in Syria that could be defined as either a loss or a win for the US, but there isn’t, not as things are currently configured. Obama could have answered: “If Syria tries to run their fast-break offense, I think the IS will have to drop the man-on-man defense and go for the zone,” and it would be no less nonsensical.