 |
| U.S. Secretary of State with former Ambassador Michael McFaul at a 2013 meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and President Vladimir Putin |
US
BOWS TO RUSSIAN DEMAND TO KEEP ASSAD IN OFFICE. ISRAEL FOLLOWS SUIT
After two tries, US Secretary of
State JOHN KERRY finally turned President BARACK OBAMA away from his four-year
insistence that BASHAR ASSAD must go, as a precondition for a settlement of the
SYRIAN conflict. The US Secretary announced in MOSCOW: “The UNITED STATES and
our partners are not seeking so-called regime change.”
After KERRY'S first try, OBAMA
still stuck to his guns. He said in MANILLA that he didn’t believe the civil
war in SYRIA “will end while the dictator remains in power.”
USA
ARE NOT SEEKING SO-CALLED REGIME CHANGE
Almost a month went by and then,
after a day of dickering with Foreign Minister SERGEI LAVROV culminating in a
joint conference with PUTIN at the KREMLIN, KERRY confirmed this evolution in
US policy. The focus now, he said, is "not on our differences about what
can or cannot be done immediately about ASSAD." Rather, it is on
facilitating a peace process in which "SYRIANS will be making decisions
for the future of SYRIA."
This statement brought WASHINGTON
in line with MOSCOW’S demand for the SYRIAN president’s future to be determined
by his own people.
On this demand, IRAN’S AYATOLLAH
ALI KHAMENEI is even more obdurate than PUTIN.
WASHINGTON’S “surrender” to the RUSSIAN
and IRANIAN line on ASSAD’S future was offered in the short-term hope of
progress at the major international conference on the SYRIAN question taking
place in NEW YORK.
Another major US concession –
this one to TEHRAN - was scarcely noticed.
The UN nuclear watchdog's
35-nation board in VIENNA closed its investigation into whether IRAN sought
atomic weapons, opting to back the international deal with TEHRAN rather than
dwell on IRAN'S past activities.
This motif of going forward
toward the future rather than dwelling on the past was a repeat of the argument
for keeping ASSAD in power. It provided an alibi for allegedly letting TEHRAN
get away with the suspicion of testing a nuclear detonation at its PARCHIN
military complex, without forfeiting sanctions relief, by the simple device of
denying access to UN nuclear agency monitors to confirm those suspicions.
The OBAMA administration handed
out certificates of legitimacy to the SYRIAN dictator, who allegedly is
responsible for more than a quarter of a million deaths, and to IRAN’S advances
toward a nuclear weapon.
These epic US policy reversals
carried three major messages:
1. The OBAMA administration has
lined up behind PUTIN’S MIDDLE EAST objectives which hinge on keeping BASHAR ASSAD in power.
2. WASHINGTON endorses RUSSIA’S massive
military intervention in SYRIA, although as recently as last month OBAMA condemned
it as doomed to failure.
3. The US now stands behind IRAN
- not just on the SYRIAN question - but also on the existence of an IRANIAN-SYRIAN-HIZBALLAH
alliance, based on a solid land bridge from IRAN and the GULF up to the MEDITERRANEAN
coast under RUSSIAN military and political protection and influence.
OFFICIAL
VERSUS UNOFFICIAL ISRAELI STANCE ON ASSAD AND IRAN
Even more surprising were the
sentiments heard this week in JERUSALEM.
Our military and intelligence
sources cite officials urging the government to accept the AMERICAN policy
turnaround. In some military circles, senior voices were heard commenting
favorably on ASSAD’S new prospects of survival in power, or advising ISRAEL to
jump aboard the evolving setup rather than obstructing it.
Geopolitical
Analysis and Monitoring wrote in June 2012: ISRAEL’S INTERESTS
ISRAEL PREFERS THE
ASSAD REGIME TO CONTINUE, FOR IT IS A KNOWN ENTITY
……..This is almost
certainly because the ISRAELI Prime Minister would, on balance, prefer the
Assad regime to continue; it is a known quantity and any new regime could
severely destabilize the effective balance-of-power between two uneasy
neighbors’…………
Those same “experts” long claimed
that Assad’s days were numbered. They were wrong then and they are wrong now.
Israel was “forced to yield” on
the IRANIAN nuclear program, but its acceptance of the permanence of ASSAD and
the indefinite presence in SYRIA of his sponsors, IRAN and Hizballah, will come
at a high price for ISRAEL in the next conflict.
Comment by Geopolitical Analysis
and Monitoring: Above paragraph is the “official” stance on IRAN.
Behind the scenes, ISRAELI IRANIAN relations look somewhat different.
Background Information:
IRAN AND ISRAELI RELATIONS
UNTIL THE BEGINNING OF
1979, ISRAEL FOUGHT HARD TO HELP SUSTAIN THE UNITY AND STRENGTH OF IRAN
ARE IRAN AND ISRAEL REALLY
ARCHENEMIES, OR IS IT JUST A FACADE?
ISRAEL’S IRAN “WARMONGERING
RHETORIC’S” ARE DECEIVING TACTICS FOR A GREATER CAUSE
Comment by Geopolitical Analysis
and Monitoring in 2012:
CORE OF THE ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCE
(IDF) AND THE ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY ARE TOTALLY OPPOSED TO A MILITARY
STRIKE AGAINST IRAN’S NUCLEAR FACILITIES
Adapted by Geopolitical Analysis
and Monitoring from the original article published by DEBKAFile’s
No comments:
Post a Comment