Israeli tanks on the Golan Heights near the Syrian border, July 27 2020Credit: Gil Eliahu

Was the incident overnight between Sunday and Monday near the border with Syria a second attempt by Hezbollah to avenge the death of one of its operatives killed in an airstrike near Damascus two weeks ago? Army officials are not saying explicitly, but there is a good chance that the answer would be yes. And this time too, the attempt failed.

Combat soldiers from the army’s Maglan commando unit, backed by aircraft, lay in wait to ambush the Hezbollah squad, whose four members apparently laid an explosive charge near the border fence and were all apparently killed.

The incident occurred in a Golan Heights salient that is east of the border fence but in an area still under Israeli control. The members of the squad crossed the so-called Alpha line Sunday evening, which is delineated with barrels and is at the edge of the buffer zone. They continued west toward the border fence. According to the military, some were armed and were shot while trying to lay explosives near the fence.

As in the event a week ago in the Har Dov border area with Lebanon, it’s apparent that army spotters had been tracking the squad’s movements before it even reached its destination. And as with the prior incident, troops were prepared for an ambush. Maglan soldiers had been on the scene for several days.

Unlike the first incident, the order was given to shoot to kill. At Har Dov, the decision had been taken at the senior political and military levels not to kill the Hezbollah operatives, but instead to cause them to flee. The consideration behind last week’s unusual policy related to the general situation in the region. It was thought that killing additional Hezbollah fighters could increase the risk of escalation, and the military decided to make do with warning shots and force them to retreat. Hezbollah then completely denied that an infiltration attempt had been made, announcing that it had yet to settle accounts.

The decision this time around to shoot to kill was apparently related to criticism over the prior decision, but also to the geographic setting. In Lebanese border incidents, Hezbollah deploys its own people. But prior experience shows that the group usually uses proxies in operations against Israel on the Syrian border. A group of several of its people, which has been dubbed the Golan File, works to deploy local squads as required for attacks in that area.

The army has hit such squads in several instances along the Golan border over the past seven years. On a few occasions, the heads of local groups acting on behalf of Hezbollah have been killed in air attacks attributed to Israel, including Samir Kuntar, who carried out a terrorist attack in Nahariya in 1978, and Jihad Mughniyeh, whose father, Imad, was considered the organization’s military chief of staff (and died in a targeted killing in 2008). The last time there was a similar incident on the Golan border was on March 2 of this year, which day of the most recent election, when the army foiled a Hezbollah attempted sniper attack against soldiers.

• A Crumbling Lebanon Demands a Lifeline, Not War, and Hezbollah May Have to Change Course
• Israel Tells Hezbollah It Didn’t Intend to Kill Militant in Airstrike, Report Says
• Iran’s Secret Anti-aircraft Weapon

Israel still isn’t explicitly accusing Hezbollah of responsibility for the incident overnight Sunday. And the possibility apparently exists, even if the prospects are slim, that it was a cell with a different ideological affiliation that carried out the most recent operation. Throughout the years of the civil war in Syria, rebel organizations operated in the area. The local ISIS offshoot controlled portions of the southern Syrian Golan until the summer of 2018, when the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad retook the entire Syrian side of the Golan Heights, with Russian assistance.

In fact, for several years the Israeli army operated a field hospital in the area where this week’s incident occurred that treated Syrian civilians from the Golan area, most of whom were Sunni residents of the villages where the rebels operated. The field hospital was closed with the return of the Assad regime.

On Monday morning, in nearly automatic fashion, Israel accused the Syrian regime of responsibility for the latest incident, by virtue of its control of the area. At this point, Israel has not clearly accused Hezbollah. It’s possible that this was deliberate, out of a desire not to corner Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah into promising additional revenge.

For the time being, it appears that Hezbollah has chalked up two failures in two attempts. What military intelligence will seek to ascertain is whether Nasrallah will make do with that or wait for another opportune time in the near future. The sites selected so far – Har Dov and the Golan Heights – reflect Nasrallah’s desire for a limited, controlled operation without a slide into a wider conflict. In any event, the army is prepared for the possibility that the tension in the north will continue in the coming weeks.

Source:

The post Nasrallah Apparently Failed to Attack Israel for a Second Time. He May Try Again first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Mohssen Assanimoghaddam—DPA/Getty Images

It feels like a lifetime ago that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was shoving Syrian refugees toward Greece in a desperate attempt to involve the Europeans more directly in Syria. Erdogan had learned the hard way that he wasn’t a match for Syria’s Bashar Assad so long as Russia’s Vladimir Putin was backing him.

That was barely a month ago.

Erdogan gambled that avoiding another migration crisis was Europe’s top priority, which would give him leverage over Brussels. Needless to say, Europe now has other priorities. But just because coronavirus is front of mind these days doesn’t mean the potential for another European refugee crisis has gone away. Here’s what you need to know.

Why It Matters:

Start with the current situation in Syria. After a near-decade of civil war, there’s not much health care infrastructure left to deal with the coronavirus outbreak—just 64 percent of public hospitals in the country are deemed to be “fully functioning.” Coronavirus was first officially announced on March 22, and the virus prompted Assad to pause mandatory military conscription and all non-essential business, halt public transport, impose curfews and limit travel between the regions under his control. But instituting lockdowns are a last-ditch effort undertaken by governments to buy themselves time to shore up medical supplies and ensure their health care system isn’t overwhelmed; as France, the U.S., and countless other developed markets are currently proving, that’s difficult under the best of circumstances and comes with tremendous economic costs. With its economy and healthcare system already in tatters, Syria isn’t in a position to deal with either the medical or financial fallout from the coronavirus.

And that’s the uncontested part of Syria. The situation in Idlib, the last remaining holdout of anti-Assad forces in the country and the focus of the Turkish offensive, is another matter entirely. One million people have been displaced in Idlib, and social distancing isn’t a viable option in overcrowded refugee camps. If violence wasn’t enough to get Syrians to flee, the prospect of contracting coronavirus in a country with such few medical resources left may well do the trick. Hence why Ankara is eyeing the Syria situation so warily, worried that individuals with coronavirus may still try to sneak through the shuttered Syria-Turkey border.

What Happens Next:

With transmissibility of the coronavirus as high as it is, that would be a major problem for Turkish authorities already very much struggling with their coronavirus response domestically. Erdogan will try to reinforce the Turkish-Syria border with more Turkish troops; the 3.6 million Syrian refugees already being housed in Turkey are far from popular among the Turkish populace, which makes diverting resources to assist them that much harder. So long as there is not a massive exodus of Syrian refugees towards Turkey, Erdogan is content to ignore them for the sake of his own political fortunes and Turkey’s financial position.

But avoiding that exodus depends on Russia not prodding Assad to launch an offensive to capture Idlib and secure total victory. Russia is also struggling to contain the coronavirus outbreak at home, but if the opportunity presents itself, it might well push Assad to assert more control over the city, bringing more refugees to Turkey and piling the domestic pressure on Erdogan.

That’s the nightmare situation for Erdogan, as Erdogan can’t try the same move of pushing refugees into Europe like he did last month. Certain European countries—Greece chief among them—treated Erdogan’s decision to send refugees to European borders as a hostile act, though some countries (like Germany) tried to remain level-headed about it, hoping that sending more money to Ankara would kick the can down the road further. If Erdogan were to try to do the same with refugees carrying coronavirus (or even just suspected of doing so), it would be treated as an openly hostile act.

And the Europeans are also braced for such a move following the events of last month. Greece suspended asylum applications in violation of international law, but with the backing of Brussels, which placed the continent’s territorial sovereignty above international law. A refugee crisis interwoven with a coronavirus crisis is a crisis for the entire E.U. And unlike financial matters that typically lay bare the schisms in the union (the latest is the flare-up between north and south over coronabonds), an assault on the territorial integrity and health of the European public would bind the E.U. together in the face of this common, immediate threat.

Two things, in particular, are worrying European lawmakers these days on the migration front; first, the warming weather might compel some refugees to undertake the journey regardless of whether or not they have Turkish support. Second, Erdogan is notoriously erratic when he feels political pressure, and if he gets to that point of desperation, he might try to foist Syrian refugees on Europe in an attempt to relieve pressure on himself back home. But Europe will hold the line in protecting its borders from the outside… even if it requires violence. That’s bad news for a Europe that wanted to project itself as a beacon of Western and humanitarian values to the world, that’s bad news for Erdogan who will struggle to offload a refugee population that Turks are growing increasingly hostile against, and it’s even worse news for the refugees stuck in the middle between the two.

The One Thing to Say About It on a Zoom Call:

This wouldn’t be a 21st-century crisis if refugees didn’t manage to get the most screwed at the end. This might be the one thing that coronavirus hasn’t upended.

The Key Quote That Sums It All Up:

“The epidemic has bolstered the cause of those who have long opposed refugees — most of them the same parties and politicians who advocate for strict border controls. But if the public debate plays up the perceived link between the virus, borders, and migrants, this will come dangerously close to arguments about national purity and racial superiority.” Pawel Zerka of the European Council on Foreign Relations.

The post What Happens Next with Syrian Refugees, Europe and Coronavirus first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

In this photo provided by the Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets, which has been authenticated based on its contents and other AP reporting, Syrian White Helmet civil defense workers carry a victim next to a destroyed house that was hit by Russian airstrikes, in Maaret Musreen village, in Idlib province, Syria, Thursday, March 5, 2020. An airstrike on a rebel-held village in northwestern Syria early Thursday. (Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets via AP)

This photo provided by the Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets, which has been authenticated based on its contents and other AP reporting, a Syrian White Helmet civil defense worker carries a child victim after Russian airstrikes hit Maaret Musreen village, in Idlib province, Syria, Thursday, March 5, 2020. An airstrike on a rebel-held village in northwestern Syria early Thursday. (Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets via AP)

In this photo provided by the Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets, which has been authenticated based on its contents and other AP reporting, Syrian White Helmet civil defense workers carry a victim next of destroyed houses hit by Russian airstrikes, in Maaret Musreen village, in Idlib province, Syria, Thursday, March 5, 2020. An airstrike on a rebel-held village in northwestern Syria early Thursday. (Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets via AP)

Russian President Vladimir Putin, second from right, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, center, talk during their meeting in the Kremlin, in Moscow, Russia, Thursday, March 5, 2020. The Turkish and Russian leaders are holding talks in Moscow aimed at avoiding pitting their nations against each other, during hostilities in northwestern Syria. (AP Photo/Pavel Golovkin, Pool)

A migrant child walks next to a tent in Edirne near the Turkish-Greek border on Thursday, March 5, 2020. Turkey said Thursday it would deploy special forces along its land border with Greece to prevent Greek authorities from pushing back migrants trying to cross into Europe after Turkey declared its previously guarded gateways to Europe open. (AP Photo/Emrah Gurel)

Note: 5 more photos available at the source.

MOSCOW (AP) — The presidents of Russia and Turkey said they reached agreement on a cease-fire to begin at midnight Thursday in northwestern Syria, where escalating fighting had threatened to put forces from the two countries into direct conflict.

The deal struck by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan also would set up a security corridor along a key east-west highway in Idlib province.

Putin voiced hope the agreement will serve as a “good basis for ending the fighting in the Idlib de-escalation zone, put an end to suffering of civilian population and contain a growing humanitarian crisis.”

The agreement appears to achieve Russia’s key goal of allowing the Syrian government to secure control over strategic highways essential for consolidating its grip on the country after a devastating nine-year war.

But in a nod to Turkey’s interests, the deal also puts the brakes on Syrian President Bashar Assad’s push to reclaim control over all of Idlib province, the last opposition-controlled region that borders Turkey.

Erdogan said he and Putin agreed to help refugees return to their homes. More than 900,000 people have been displaced by the fighting since Assad’s forces began an offensive in December backed by Russian airstrikes.

Both leaders had underlined the need for an agreement at the start of the Kremlin talks, which lasted more than six hours. One goal had been to prevent damaging their bilateral relations and blossoming trade.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres “takes note” of the cease-fire agreement and hopes it will lead “to an immediate and lasting cessation of hostilities that ensures the protection of civilians in northwest Syria, who have already endured enormous suffering,” U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said.

Guterres also called for a return to the U.N.-facilitated political process, aimed at ending the nine-year conflict, Dujarric said.

Until the latest crisis, Putin and Erdogan had managed to coordinate their interests in Syria even though Moscow backed Assad while Ankara supported the government’s foes. Both Russia and Turkey wanted to avoid a showdown but the sharply conflicting interests in Idlib province made it difficult to negotiate a mutually acceptable compromise.

The Syrian offensive in Idlib has resulted in Turkey sending in thousands of troops to repel the Syrian army. Clashes on the ground and in the air have left dozens dead on both sides. Russia, which has helped Assad reclaim most of the country’s territory, has signaled it won’t sit by while Turkey routs his troops.

The fighting also has pushed nearly 1 million Syrian civilians toward Turkey, which already hosts more than 3.5 million Syrian refugees. Erdogan responded by opening Turkey’s gateway to Europe in an apparent bid to persuade the West to offer more support to Ankara.

He has frequently threatened to open Turkey’s borders to Europe, maintaining that the European Union has not upheld its end of a more than 6 billion-euro deal designed to stem the flow of migrants after more than 1 million people entered the EU in 2015.

Putin discussed the situation in Idlib with European Council head Charles Michel, who met the Erdogan in Ankara on Wednesday. The Kremlin said Michel informed Putin about the EU’s efforts to block the flow of migrants.

Putin offered Erdogan his condolences over Turkish military losses but noted that Syrian troops also suffered heavy casualties. Turkey’s Defense Ministry announced that two more of its soldiers were killed Thursday, raising the number slain in Syria since the start of February to 60.

“The world’s eyes are on us,” Erdogan had said. “The steps we will take, the right decisions we will take here today will help ease (concerns in) the region and our countries.”

After Turkey had downed several Syrian jets, Moscow warned Ankara on Sunday that its aircraft would be unsafe if they enter Syrian airspace.

Opposition activists in Idlib blamed Russia for Thursday’s strike on a rebel-held village that they said killed at least 15 people, including children, and wounded several others. The Russian military had no immediate comment, but it has denied similar claims by insisting it hasn’t targeted residential areas.

The fighting in Idlib is the most severe test of Russia-Turkey ties since Turkey’s downed a Russian warplane near the Syrian border in November 2015. Russia responded then with sweeping economic sanctions, cutting the flow of its tourists to Turkey and banning most Turkish exports — a punishment that eventually forced Turkey to back off.

Turkey can’t afford a replay of that costly crisis, much less a military conflict with a nuclear power, but it has a strong bargaining position. Moscow needs Ankara as a partner in a Syrian settlement, and Russia’s supply routes for its forces in Syria lie through the Turkish Straits.

Moscow also hopes to use Ankara in its standoff with the West. Last year, Turkey became the first NATO country to take delivery of sophisticated Russian air defense missile systems, angering Washington. Turkey has put its deployment on hold amid the crisis in Idlib.

The talks in Moscow marked the 10th meeting in just over a year between Putin and Erdogan, who call each other “dear friend” and have polished a fine art of bargaining.

In October, they agreed to deploy their forces across Syria’s northeastern border to fill the void left by President Donald Trump’s abrupt withdrawal of U.S. forces. Before that, they had negotiated deals that saw opposition fighters from various areas in Syria move into Idlib, and in 2018 carved out a de-escalation zone in Idlib.

They blamed one another for the collapse of the Idlib deal, with Moscow holding Ankara responsible for letting al-Qaida-linked militants launch attacks from the area and Turkey accusing Moscow of failing to rein in Assad.

The Russian and Turkish foreign ministers said Thursday’s agreement involves a cease-fire to be enforced starting at midnight along existing battle lines. The deal also envisages setting up a 12-kilometer (7-mile) security corridor along the M4 highway to be jointly patrolled by Russian and Turkish troops, starting March 15.

A security corridor along the M4 that crosses Idlib to reach the Mediterranean province of Latakia, where Russia has its main base, will help solidify Assad’s gains and strengthen his control.

Earlier this year, Assad retook control of the M5 highway linking Damascus with Aleppo, the country’s commercial capital. As part of their latest offensive, Assad’s forces have pushed back the militants who were blocking it.

Earlier this week, Russian military police deployed to the strategic town of Saraqeb, sitting on the junction of the two highways, to ward off any Turkish attempt to retake it.

In the deal with Erdogan, Putin appeared to accept the presence of Turkey-backed militants in areas alongside the border and put brakes for now on Assad’s attempts to claim full control over Idlib. That compromise will allow Turkey to secure its stake in Syria and prevent refugees from fleeing across the border.

Soner Cagaptay, an expert on Turkey at the Washington Institute, said the agreement “freezes the conflict on the ground.”

The fighting was not expected to flare up again until “the next moment when Putin feels emboldened enough to push further,” Cagaptay said.

For his part, Erdogan avoided a situation where Turkey’s borders would be overwhelmed by refugees, while also preventing a rupture with Russia, the analyst said.

Cagaptay also said Assad did not emerge the winner.

“His military capabilities have been undermined by Turkey,” he said. “We witnessed a NATO country pummeling Assad’s third-rate army.”

Konstantin Kosachev, head of the Russian upper house’s foreign affairs committee, hailed the deal as a compromise that respected security interests of each country.

“The only alternative to the talks would be trying to sort out the differences on the battlefield, and neither side needs that,” he said on Facebook.

___

Fraser reported from Ankara, Turkey.

Source: https://apnews.com/e70a96d67ec37e4908a71adab85bc096

The post Russia, Turkey reach cease-fire deal in northwestern Syria first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Illustrative: Iran says it successfully tested the Hoveizeh cruise missile on February 2, 2019 (Screen grab via Tasnim)

Israel is readying for a direct cruise missile or drone strike by Tehran in response to recent attacks on Iranian regional proxies which have been attributed to the Jewish state, Army Radio reported Tuesday evening.

Unlike ballistic missiles, which usually fly through a high arc on the way to the target, cruise missiles and drones fly at low altitude, making them harder to detect.

The report cited anonymous “Israeli sources,” who said the IDF was already on high alert for the possibility and that the security cabinet will convene for an “unplanned” meeting next Tuesday against a backdrop of tensions with the Islamic Republic.

This would be the second time this month that the high-level security cabinet has convened. On October 6, its members gathered amid cryptic warnings by Israeli leaders of a growing security threat from Iran. That meeting lasted for nearly six hours.

During the meeting, ministers discussed a proposal, being pushed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for a NIS 1 billion ($290 million) project to boost Israel’s air defenses that would place particular focus on defending the country against cruise missile attacks.

A suicide drone developed by Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards, October 26, 2016 (AFP)

Channel 12 at the time cited anonymous officials who believed Tehran may have publicized information about an allegedly foiled “Israel-Arab” plot to assassinate General Qassem Soleimani, the head of the elite Quds Force in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as a pretense to attack Israel.

Both Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin have mentioned crucial security needs in recent days as they called for the formation of a broad unity government after the September 17 elections.

Iran appears to have been building up its drone activities and attacks in recent months — in August, Israeli fighter jets carried out airstrikes in Syria to thwart a planned attack on Israel by Iran-backed fighters using armed drones, the Israel Defense Forces said. The Israeli military said its strike targeted operatives from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force as well as Shiite militias who had been planning on sending “kamikaze” attack drones into Israel armed with explosives.

In September, a cruise missile and drone attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities knocked out half the kingdom’s oil production. Although Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthi rebels claimed responsibility, the US, Britain, France, Germany, and Saudi Arabia have blamed Iran of being behind the attack.

Channel 12 News reported that defense officials who have studied the weapons used in the attack on the Saudi facilities concluded that a similar assault by Iran on Israel if it came, would likely be launched from western Iraq, where there is a strong presence of Iran-backed militias.

Iran regularly threatens Israel, viewing the country as a powerful enemy allied with the United States and Sunni countries in the region against Tehran and its nuclear ambitions.

Israel has also thwarted Iranian operations in neighboring Syria where its fighters and those of Iranian proxy Hezbollah have been fighting alongside forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad since 2011.

In this photo from August 12, 2019, plumes of smoke rise after an explosion at a military base southwest of Baghdad, Iraq. (AP Photo/Loay Hameed)

---

Israel has vowed to prevent Iran’s regional proxy militias from obtaining advanced weapons to use against the Jewish state and has carried out hundreds of airstrikes in Syria that it says were to prevent delivery of weapons and to stop the Iranian military entrenchment in that country.

Late last month, Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi announced that investigations have determined the recent spate of airstrikes targeting powerful Iranian-backed militias in Iraq were carried out by Israel.

The Qatari-funded TV network also quoted him as saying that “many indicators show that no one wants war in the region except for Israel,” according to a translation by the Reuters news agency.

A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces declined to comment on the statements from the Iraqi premier, saying “these are reports from foreign media and we do not comment on them.”

Since July, there have been at least nine strikes both inside Iraq and across the border in Syria, targeting the Iran-backed militias, known collectively as the Popular Mobilization Forces, or PMF.

Leaders of the powerful Shiite paramilitary group have repeatedly blamed Israel and by extension its US ally, which maintains more than 5,000 troops in Iraq.

Israel has not confirmed its involvement in the attacks, though Netanyahu has hinted at the possibility that it has struck in Iraq.

Earlier this month, a senior Iranian lawmaker blamed Israel, the United States, and Saudi Arabia for an alleged attack on an oil tanker off the Saudi coast and said he would take the complaint to the UN.

This photo taken on Sunday, Oct. 13, 2019, and released by the official news agency of the Iranian Oil Ministry, SHANA, shows the scene of damage by two missiles that allegedly struck the Iranian oil tanker Sabiti, at the Red Sea. (SHANA via AP)

---

Tehran says the Iranian-flagged Sabiti tanker was hit by two separate explosions off the Red Sea port of Jeddah.

Hassan Beigi, a member of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign policy commission, claimed without evidence that the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia were alleging the Islamic State jihadist group or Afghanistan’s Taliban for an alleged attack on an oil tanker last week off the Saudi coast and said he would take the complaint to the UN.

---

Source: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-said-bracing-for-direct-cruise-missile-or-drone-attack-by-iran/

[Disclaimer]

The post Israel said bracing for direct cruise missile or drone attack by Iran first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan shake hands during their meeting in Ankara, Sept. 16 | Photo: Pool via Reuters / Pavel Golovkin

Turkey’s incursion into Syria is an opportunity for Russia to dial up its influence in the region as Washington appears to be pulling back, but the risks to Moscow’s diplomacy will rise the longer the operation goes on, people close to the Kremlin say.

In a phone call with Turkish President Tayyip Erdoğan before the operation against US-allied Kurdish fighters, Russian leader Vladimir Putin, an ally of Syrian President Bashar Assad, made clear he hoped the incursion would be limited in time and scale, the sources said.

“The sooner this conflict situation is over, the better for everyone,” said Andrei Klimov, a senior pro-Putin lawmaker in Russia’s Senate.

“I really hope our Turkish partners do everything to avoid even a chance conflict on the ground with Syrian government forces and even more so with Russian soldiers.”

For Russia, it’s a delicate balancing act. It has pledged to use its air power to help Assad retake all the territory he has lost in Syria’s eight-year-old war and has repeatedly stressed the importance of the country’s territorial integrity.

But it is also working with Turkey and Iran to push for a peaceful settlement it hopes will eventually reshape Syria’s constitution and show that Russia can make peace as well as war.

Critics say Moscow’s efforts are a sham, aimed at yielding a fake political settlement to relegitimize Assad and attract funds from the European Union and the Gulf to rebuild Syria.

For Moscow, success would cap a 2015 intervention in Syria that gave Russia new clout in the Middle East and that it is keen to build on, particularly at a time when Washington appears to be distancing itself from the region.

US President Donald Trump pulled US troops out of the way of Turkey’s offensive earlier this week, drawing bipartisan criticism from members of Congress who credit the Kurds with fighting alongside Americans to defeat Islamic State.

Ankara brands the Syrian Kurdish YPG militia as terrorists because of their ties to militants who have waged an insurgency in Turkey.

A Turkish operation that drags on too long or gets too messy may upset the Kremlin’s diplomatic efforts.

Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said on Thursday that while Moscow was sympathetic to Ankara’s security concerns, Putin told Erdoğan his forces should tread carefully.

“We consider it important that all sides show restraint and carefully weigh their practical steps so as not to damage the measures taken to achieve a political settlement,” said Ushakov.

He pointed to the first scheduled meeting of a Moscow-backed Syrian constitutional committee on Oct. 29 as something that should not be disrupted and said it would be unacceptable for Moscow if civilians suffered in the Turkish offensive.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made clear on Thursday that Moscow is already positioning itself for a role as intermediary in resolving the latest twist in Syria’s long-drawn-out conflict.

That could involve brokering talks between Ankara and Damascus, which wants Turkish forces out, and between Damascus and the Kurds, who want a measure of autonomy inside Syria that Assad has so far shown no sign of giving.

Lavrov told reporters Moscow would try both, noting apparent enthusiasm for Russia’s services from both the Syrian and Kurdish sides.

“Let us see what we can do,” Lavrov said.

Mathieu Boulègue, a research fellow at Chatham House in London, said: “Russia is probably the only player in the room among the grown-ups who can talk with everyone in the room at the same time. Whether it’s Israel and Iran, or with Kurdish forces and Turkey, or Assad and everyone else.”

For Putin, this would be a significant geopolitical win.

“If he manages to fix this it would be considered a major political victory,” said Andrey Kortunov, head of the Russian International Affairs Council, a think tank close to the Russian Foreign Ministry.

“Putin could argue that the Americans failed to sort this out but we managed it, which implies our approach to the conflict is more efficient than our geopolitical opponents.”

If Turkey limits its operation to a 30-mile security zone inside Syria and conducts a quick operation, Russia is likely to tolerate it, said Vladimir Frolov, a senior former Russian diplomat.

Given Russia’s deployment of advanced air defense systems in Syria and its airbase there, it has the technical ability to halt any Turkish advance if it wants, he said.

“If Erdoğan wanted to go further into Syria and all but partition it … Moscow will try to block this by forward deploying Russian observation posts with Russian air cover,” predicted Frolov.

“Russia controls the skies in Syria and Turkey flies its planes now at Moscow’s

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/2019/10/11/turkish-move-into-syria-gives-putin-a-chance-to-ramp-up-middle-east-role/

The post Turkish move into Syria gives Putin a chance to ramp up Middle East role first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper called his Russian counterpart Sergey Shoigu on Monday, as US President Donald Trump announced the US pullout from northeastern Syria. No details of the call were given by either side.

Pentagon’s outreach comes amid a firestorm of criticism in the US over Trump’s decision to withdraw, with people on both sides of the aisle depicting it as a “betrayal” of Washington’s Kurdish allies. Opponents of the withdrawal claim that it will open the door to Turkey – a NATO ally of the US – to attack the Kurds, whom the US enlisted to fight against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) in northeastern Syria.

The previous administration also sought to use the Kurds as the embryo or a US-aligned administration in Syria, controlling the country’s oil resources and facilitating plans for regime change in Damascus. Meanwhile, Russia has supported the government of President Bashar Assad as the only legitimate and internationally recognized authority.

Source: https://www.rt.com/newsline/470386-pentagon-calls-russia-syria-withdrawal/

The post Pentagon calls Russia as US announces Syria withdrawal first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

A demonstrator holds a representation of the Israeli flag which is set on fire during the annual Quds, or Jerusalem Day rally in Tehran, Iran, May 31, 2019. Vahid Salemi,AP

• Israel strikes Syria, says it foiled Iranian drone attack

• As Hezbollah leader blasts Israel, Iran-backed militias struck on Iraq-Syria border

• Israel says Iran’s Quds Force team arrived in Syria months ago to prepare for drone attack

  ---

  The Iranian plan to launch a swarm of “killer drones” toward Israeli targets from Syria, which was foiled by the Israel Defense Forces on Saturday night, was not exactly unprecedented.

  >> Subscribe for just $1 now

  In the last 19 months, there have been at least four attempts by Iran, or militias working on its behalf, to launch either attack drones or missiles toward Israel — starting with the UAV shot down by an Israeli Apache helicopter moments after it crossed the border in February 2018.

  What is different in this latest escalation is that the level of preparation by the Iranians seems higher than previously. The decision taken by the high command of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps to launch the attack can be directly linked to its desire to retaliate for reported airstrikes by Israel against Iranian-backed militias in Iraq.

  What is also new is the swiftness of Israel’s acknowledgment of these particular strikes, both in detailed briefings by the IDF spokesperson’s unit and statements from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. While most of the unclaimed Israeli attacks were targeted at future threats, the IDF said the latest strike prevented an immediate attack on Israel.

  And of course, there is also the perhaps coincidental fact that Netanyahu is facing a crucial election in three weeks’ time. (Before the April election, he displayed similar willingness to claim strikes in Syria.)

  Despite its sworn enmity of the Jewish state for four decades, the Islamic revolutionary leadership of Iran avoided a direct military confrontation with Israel; instead, it used its various proxies.

  The strategic shift from February 2018, toward active participation of the IRGC’s Quds force in the attacks, is a result of several factors, some springing from internal Iranian politics and the desire to score propaganda victories. Had some of the drones succeeded in targeting Israel, the damage would have been relatively minor, as they can only carry a few kilograms of explosives. But the effect on both the Israeli and Iranian public consciousnesses would have been enormous.

  
  Damage inside a media center of Hezbollah in the south of the capital Beirut, after two drones came down in the vicinity of its building earlier in the day, August 25, 2019.\ MOHAMED AZAKIR/ REUTERS

  ---

  Another reason for the IRGC’s willingness to take higher risks and commit to a major escalation with Israel is its frustration at Israel’s successful interdiction of its plan to establish a permanent military presence in Syria, including the threat posed by such a presence to Israel’s heartland.

  Israel has achieved considerable success — both on an intelligence level in detecting Iran’s attempts, and operationally in attacking and destroying Iranian assets in Syria in hundreds of strikes, most of which have remained unacknowledged. But it should remain in perspective as well.

  Israel has succeeded in foiling Iranian attack plans and preventing the establishment of long-term bases on Syrian soil. But it has fallen short on its overarching goal of ending all Iranian military presence in the country. This was to be achieved partly through pressure from Russia (and the United States), but as Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown, he is playing a much more complicated game in Syria.

  Since Russia’s deployment to Syria, it has partnered with Iran in propping up the regime of Bashar Assad. At the same time, it hasn’t acted to block Israel from attacking Iranian assets there. The undeclared pact between Netanyahu and Putin is that Israel can go after Iran’s offensive capacities when these threaten Israel.

  But the forces amassed by Iran in Syria — mainly Hezbollah fighters and Shi’ite Afghan, Iraqi and Pakistani militia members, trained in Iran — have remained untouched. Russia wants Shi’ite boots on the ground so that it doesn’t have to risk too many of its own soldiers. In other words, Iran has produced the cannon fodder.

  At various points during the eight-year war in Syria, there have been those within the Israeli security establishment who called for attacks on the Assad regime forces who killed hundreds of thousands and uprooted millions of Syrian civilians. Netanyahu intentionally limited the scope of Israel’s operations in Syria, striking only targets that could potentially pose a direct threat to Israel. This policy became even more rigid once Russian forces arrived in Syria.

  Essentially, Israel and Iran are at a stalemate in Syria. Iran has kept Assad in power, but its plans to turn Syria into another base for its proxy operations — as it has done in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen — have been foiled so far. And yet there are tens of thousands of Shi’ite fighters in Syria, under Iran’s direct control. As proven by the events of Saturday night, they will continue trying to use Syria as a launchpad for attacks on Israel.

The post Analysis Why Iran Is Risking a Major Escalation With Israel first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Location of two reported Israeli strikes against Iran targets in Iraq – Google Maps

• In a major shift, Israel twice struck Iranian targets in Iraq ‘using F-35’

• U.S. sanctions may cripple Iran, but it’s not why billions of dollars keep vanishing

• Israel is the only country in the world killing Iranians, senior Israeli minister boasts

Iran’s military entrenchment in Iraq poses a threat to Israel, defense officials say.

Iran began bolstering its presence in Iraq after Israel stepped up attacks on Iranian targets in Syria and Syrian President Bashar Assad regained control over most of his country. Israel’s efforts to thwart Iran’s attempts to bring sophisticated weaponry and air and naval forces into Syria led Tehran to revert to its old method of relying on local militias, which is harder for Israel to counter.

Israel’s intelligence assessment for 2019 states that despite Iran’s difficulties in entrenching itself militarily in Syria, it hasn’t given up on its ambition “to create regional hegemony for itself via alliances spreading from Iran through Iraq and Syria to Lebanon.” Nevertheless, the assessment continued: “Iran has been forced to recalculate the way it tries to realize its regional vision. This recalculation led Iran to realize that the domestic and international situation in Iraq created better opportunities for it to prepare its regional plans.”

Israeli defense officials say Iran has shifted the bulk of its deployment of missile systems outside the country to Iraq, which is harder for Israel to attack than Syria was. The latest airstrikes on Iraq, which the London-based paper Asharq Al-Awsat attributed to Israel on Tuesday, were aimed at such missile systems.

According to Israeli intelligence, Iran is currently providing Iraqi militias with missiles that have ranges of 200 to 700 kilometers and are capable of hitting anywhere in Israel. These missiles are more accurate than the ones in Hezbollah’s arsenal. Iran may use them either to hit Israel directly from northern Iraq or to transfer them as needed to Syria and Lebanon.

Iran’s regional deployment is largely based on missiles because it doesn’t think its aerial and ground forces are capable of standing up to Western armies. Consequently, it has focused on improving both the range and accuracy of its missiles in recent years.

According to media reports, the latest airstrikes attributed to Israel took place in northwestern Iraq. They targeted weapons storehouses and missiles at bases where Iranian advisers were present.

Two weeks ago, the media reported a drone strike in Iraq that killed members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah. Foreign media reports said the target that time was a base where missiles destined for Iranian-backed militias in Iraq were being stored.

Foreign media have also reported several other attacks on Iraq, some of which were attributed to Israel.

So far, however, Israel has kept mum about all these attacks, aside from a video clip published by the ruling Likud party that showed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in an old speech to the United Nations vowing to act against Iran anywhere, including in Iraq. This clip, reposted three days after the attack on the base where Iranian forces were killed, could be seen as a hint that Israel was behind that strike.

But Israel has much less freedom of action in Iraq than in Syria because while it has the capability to strike Iraq, doing so could create problems with the United States administration.

U.S. President Donald Trump wants calm restored to Iraq as quickly as possible, and an airstrike on the country undermines its stability and deters foreign investors and donor states. Consequently, Iran is the one country whose trade with Iran has been exempted de facto from U.S. sanctions.

U.S. spy planes have recently intensified operations along the Iraq-Syria border. This may be a way of signaling to Israel that America will take care of preventing the smuggling of sophisticated arms to Hezbollah and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq and Syria. Alternatively, America may have started taking action against Iran’s entrenchment in Iraq for fear that Iranian-sponsored militias in Iraq will attack U.S. forces.

Shi’ite militias are the second cornerstone of Iran’s military entrenchment in Iraq, alongside its missile deployments. Economic problems and growing religious extremism in many Arab countries have enabled Iran to recruit volunteers for the militias it supports. And these militias let it carry out military operations without taking responsibility for them.

Iran had ties with militias in Iraq even back in the 1980s and 1990s. But these militias have become more powerful militarily as technology improved and as their political power grew.

Iran provides them with military, economic, logistical and religious support. In exchange, they will help Iran if it asks them – including, according to a senior Israeli defense official, by coming to the Lebanese or Syrian borders to participate in fighting against Israel. The Dado Center for Interdisciplinary Military Studies, which is part of the Israel Defense Forces, also said in recent reports that Israel must take these militias into account in future fighting.

The strongest Iranian-backed militia is Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the model Iran seeks to replicate in other countries. Since 2014, it has also supported a network of Shi’ite militias in Iraq. These militias, now known as the Popular Mobilization Units, are second only to Hezbollah in terms of their importance to Iran. They united under the Popular Mobilization Units umbrella at the urging of Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the Iranian-born cleric who is the spiritual leader of Iraqi Shi’ites.

The strongest militia in the PMU is the Badr Organization, which has both a political and a military wing. The latter is thought to have some 50,000 fighters. The Badr Organization is headed by Hadi al-Amiri, a former transportation minister who is close to Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force. The organization also fought alongside America against the Islamic State.

Another important element of the PMU is Kata’ib Hezbollah. It was founded by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, an Iraqi Shi’ite trained in Iran to establish an Iraqi organization resembling the Quds Force. He is very close to Soleimani and has said in the past that he’s willing to fight alongside Iran.

The PMU also includes Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, which has perpetrated attacks on American forces in Iraq. Its leaders are very close to senior Hezbollah officials, and Hezbollah helps fund it. Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq also gets millions of dollars each month from Iran.

Iran-back Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces militia members march as they hold their flag and posters of Iraqi and Iranian Shiites spiritual leaders during “al-Quds” or Jerusalem Day, in Baghdad, Iraq Hadi Mizban, AP

The post Iran Presence in Iraq Threatens Israel, Security Officials Say first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Smoke and fire following reported Syrian government forces’ bombardment on the town of Khan Sheikhun, Idlib, June 6, 2019. AFP

“The world is watching this butchery. What is the purpose, what will it get you? STOP!” tweeted President Trump, as though he were a human rights activist or a frustrated neutral observer, rather than the leader of the world’s most powerful superpower.

By “butchery,” Trump meant the increasing Syrian and Russian attacks on the Idlib province in Syria, where at least 232 people, some 60 of them children, were killed in recent weeks. Hundreds were wounded, dozens of clinics and hospitals were wiped out and hundreds of houses were pulverized. More than 3,000 people fled the area in May alone.

skip – Trump tweet

In terms, this is a local battle and the number of victims pales in comparison with the horrendous, total numbers. But the campaign in Idlib, home to 3 million people, developed into an international conflict involving Russia and Turkey as well as Syria.

This is the rebels’ last significant bastion and its capture is necessary to complete Assad’s control of the state. Pockets of resistance remain in Hama and the south of Syria, but the most difficult challenge is the rebels’ main force, some 50,000 combatants affiliated with dozens of militias, the largest of which is a descendant of the Islamist Jabhat al-Nusra.

The big campaign against Idlib, already planned a year ago, hasn’t actually begun. In the last few days, Syrian army forces have taken over villages while Russian planes struck intensively, but these are just the opening shots, intended to pressure rebels, along with Turkey, to choose negotiations over mass killing. If the battles continue, a new mass wave of refugees is expected to enter Turkey and join the 3.5 million refugees already there.

Turkey and Russia agreed in September 2018 that Turkey would drive out the armed rebels and clear the region of heavy weapons, effectively handing over the province to Assad’s control, or at least turning it into a kind of security zone under Turkish and Russian supervision. But Turkey failed in its mission, and the rebel militias refused to lay down their arms.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, shakes hands with Syrian President Bashar Assad during a meeting in Sochi, Russia, May 17, 2018.Mikhail Klimentyev,AP

The campaign on Idlib is holding up Russia’s plans to draft a new constitution for Syria, hold elections, stabilize the government and begin the country’s rehabilitation.

But Russia has no intention of simply returning Syria to Assad’s control. It sees Syria as leverage to furthering its hold in the Middle East. This consists of building bridges with Saudi Arabia and the United Emirates, forging an economic alliance with Egypt while giving it military assistance, getting rid of American and European sanctions and bolstering its status in the world.

These Russian aspirations, however, are not compatible with Iran’s. Iran sees Syria not only as a strategic outpost that will preserve Iran’s influence in Lebanon, but as a regional outpost to counterbalance Saudi Arabia’s ambitions. This outpost will open pathways for Iran into the Mediterranean and complement the alliances it has forged with Iraq and Turkey. This is viewed as a strategic threat not only to Israel and the United States, but to Russia as well.

Recent local clashes between pro-Iranian militias and Russian-sponsored militias indicate that Russia is acting to thwart the Iranian threat. On the face of it, these are local incidents, but on a bigger scale, Russia is training and arming local militias through private Russian companies. The combatants wear Russian uniforms and use Russian weapons. Russia has also ordered Assad to fire pro-Iranian officers and soldiers while Russian officers have taken command of some Syrian army units.

Iran was painfully slapped in the face twice by Russia. Once, when Russia turned down its request to buy S-400 anti-aircraft missiles, and a second time when Russia continues to enable Israel to attack Iranian targets in Syria.

The Kremlin spokesman declared that the “distorted reports on the issue” must be treated cautiously, but Russian research analysts told journalists that Russia sees selling S-400 missile systems to Iran as “a threat to the region’s stability.”

For Iran, this is a message that Russia will not stand by its side if it is attacked by the United States or Israel, and moreover, that Russia has an interest in keeping Iran in isolation. This assumption is shared by Western observers, who say Russia’s support for Iran’s decision to reduce its commitment to the nuclear agreement stems from its desire to keep up tensions between Iran and the United States, as part of its strategic game as Europe’s exclusive oil provider.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at a meeting in Moscow, April 8 ,2019.Alexei Nikolsky,AP

Two days after Iran notified the signatory states of its decision to reduce commitments to the agreement, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared that the move was “inconceivable.” But a few days later, Lavrov justified Iran’s decision in a joint news conference with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and said that the United States had made Iran take this step.

Recently, when Trump spoke again of his desire to negotiate with Iran with no preconditions, Iran rejected the overture while Russia remained silent. Removing the sanctions from Iran or alleviating them is not in Moscow’s interest, because when the nuclear agreement came into effect, they worriedly watched how European countries set to diversify their oil sources away from Russia.

There were plans at the time to build an oil pipeline from Iran to Europe via Turkey, and part of it was already built. At the same time, a gas pipeline was completed between Russia and Turkey, meaning Russia was leading in the race. If the sanctions are lifted and Iran becomes a player in the oil market again, Russia may lose a chunk of the European market.

The meeting of Israel’s, Russia’s and the United States’ interests regarding Iran generated the idea for a summit of national security advisors, to take place in Israel this month. According to unconfirmed sources, Russia expects the United States to recognize Assad’s regime and lift sanctions. In exchange, Russia will act to drive Iran out of Syria.

This is an unusual meeting, in which the three national security advisors, Meir Ben-Shabbat, John Bolton and Nikolai Patrushev, will discuss regional developments as equal partners. Such a summit, even if it doesn’t yield immediate concrete results, conveys to Iran and the region that the Russian-American-Israeli axis could be the one to draft the new Middle East roadmap.

But immediate military and diplomatic results could be overambitious. Lavrov made it clear recently that expecting Russia to bloc Iran’s forces in Syria was “unrealistic.” Russia also failed to keep its promise to keep Iran’s forces more than 80 kilometers away from Israel’s border in the Golan Heights, and there are doubts whether it can make Iran withdraw at this stage.

About six months ago, journalist Barak Ravid reported on Channel 13 that Patrushev had proposed to Ben Shabbat, in an unofficial document, that Russia will bring about Iran’s withdrawal from Syria in exchange for lifting of sanctions by the United States. Israel rejected the proposal and the sanctions were imposed in full.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran welcomes Syrian President Bashar Assad in Tehran, Iran, February 25, 2019.,AP

If the United States decides to alleviate or revoke sanctions, it will do so in exchange for renewed negotiations with Iran and a new nuclear agreement. It will not settle for an Iranian withdrawal from Syria.

Another option is to pressure Assad to get Iran’s forces out of Syria, because he’s the one who invited them in, and Iran will find it hard to stay if they’re unwelcomed. In return, Assad may receive American recognition of his regime and an Israeli promise not to attack in Syria after the Iranian forces’ departure. He may also receive a Saudi commitment to take part in funding Syria’s rehabilitation along with Russian strategic backing. These are much more than Iran can give him.

Assad’s problem is that if he agrees to drive Iran’s forces out he will have to explain to Iran why it’s them and not Russia. Assad will also have to rely on the United States, Israel and Russia, which have repeatedly stated that their interest in Syria is not reserved for one person. In other words, Assad can also go.

Iran, on the other hand, supported him all the way, gave him credit lines and $6-8 billion in assistance. Iran was there for Assad long before the war started. But he doesn’t have to decide who to choose yet. The war isn’t over and no American temptation has yet been offered. But the moment is approaching, and Assad will have to decide.

The post Analysis There’s a New Alliance in the Middle East first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

U.S. President Donald Trump (right) and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hug after speaking at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, May 23, 2017. MANDEL NGAN / AFP

• Trump: Time for U.S. to recognize Israel’s sovereignty over Golan Heights

• In first, U.S. drops ‘occupied’ from report on West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights

• Hezbollah entrenching itself in Syrian Golan, establishing terror infrastructure, Israeli army says

  ---

The post Analysis Trump’s Golan Declaration: Blessing for Netanyahu, Message to Russia first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.