Guest Post: Be Careful: Russia Is Back To Stay In The Middle East
Submitted by Felix Imonti of OilPrice.com,
Russia is back. President Vladimir Putin wants the world to acknowledge that Russia remains a global power. He is making his stand in Syria.
The Soviet Union acquired the Tardus Naval Port in Syria in 1971 without any real purpose for it. With their ships welcomed in Algeria, Cuba or Vietnam, Tardus was too insignificant to be developed. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia lacked the funds to spend on the base and no reason to invest in it.
The Russian return to the Middle East brought them first to where the Soviet Union had had its closest ties. Libya had been a major buyer of arms and many of the military officers had studied in the Soviet Union. Russia was no longer a global power, but it could be used by the Libyans as a counter force to block domination by the United States and Europeans.
When Gaddafi fell, Tardus became Russia’s only presence in the region. That and the discovery of vast gas deposits just offshore have transformed the once insignificant port into a strategic necessity.
Earlier at the United Nations, Russia had failed to realize that Security Council Resolution 1973 that was to implement a new policy of “responsibility to protect” cloaked a hidden agenda. It was to be turned from a no-fly zone into a free-fire zone for NATO. That strategic blunder of not vetoing the resolution led to the destruction of Gaddafi’s regime and cost Russia construction contracts and its investments in Libyan gas and oil to the tune of 10 billion dollars.
That was one more in a series of humiliating defeats; and something that Putin will not allow to happen again while he is president. Since his time as an officer in the KGB, he has seen the Soviet Empire lose half of its population, a quarter of its land mass, and most of its global influence. He has described the collapse of the Soviet Union as a “geopolitical catastrophe.”
In spite of all of the pressure from Washington and elsewhere to have him persuade Bashar Al-Assad to relinquish power, Putin is staying loyal to the isolated regime. He is calculating that Russia can afford to lose among the Arabs what little prestige that it has remaining and gain a major political and economic advantage in Southern Europe and in the Eastern Mediterranean.
What Russia lost through the anti-Al-Assad alliance was the possibility to control the natural gas market across Europe and the means to shape events on the continent. In July 2011, Iran, Iraq, and Syria agreed to build a gas pipeline from the South Pars gas field in Iran to Lebanon and across the Mediterranean to Europe. The pipeline that would have been managed by Gazprom would have carried 110 million cubic meters of gas. About a quarter of the gas would be consumed by the transit countries, leaving seventy or so million cubic meters to be sold to Europe.
Violence in Iraq and the Syrian civil war has ended any hope that the pipeline will be built, but not all hope is lost. One possibility is for Al-Assad to withdraw to the traditional Aliwite coastal enclave to begin the partitioning of Syria into three or more separate zones, Aliwite, Kurdish, and Sunni. Al-Assad’s grandfather in 1936 had asked the French administrators of the Syrian mandate to create a separate Aliwite territory in order to avoid just this type of ethnic violence.
What the French would not do circumstance may force the grandson to accept as his only choice to survive. His one hundred thousand heavily armed troops would be able to defend the enclave.
The four or five million Aliwites, Christians, and Druze would have agricultural land, water, a deep water port and an international airport. Very importantly, they would have the still undeveloped natural gas offshore fields that extend from Israel, Lebanon, and Cyprus. The Aliwite Republic could be energy self-sufficient and even an exporter. Of course, Russia’s Gazprom in which Putin has a vital interest would get a privileged position in the development of the resource.
In an last effort to bring the nearly two year long civil war to an end, Russia's foreign minister Sergei Lavrov urged Syrian president Bashar al-Assad at the end of December to start talks with the Syrian opposition in line with the agreements for a cease fire that was reached in Geneva on 30 June. The Russians have also extended the invitation to the Syrian opposition National Coalition head, Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib. The National Coalition refuses to negotiate with Al-Assad and Al-Assad will not relinquish power voluntarily.
The hardened positions of both sides leaves little hope for a negotiated settlement; and foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has made it clear that only by an agreement among the Syrians will Russia accept the removal of Al-Assad. Neither do they see a settlement through a battlefield victory which leaves only a partitioning that will allow the civil war to just wind down as all sides are exhausted.
The Russians are troubled by what they see as a growing trend among the Western Powers to remove disapproved administrations in other sovereign countries and a program to isolate Russia. They saw the U.S involvement in the Ukraine and Georgia. There was the separation of Kosovo from Serbia over Russian objections. There was the extending of NATO to the Baltic States after pledging not to expand the organization to Russia’s frontier.
Again, Russia is seeing Washington’s hand in Syria in the conflict with Iran. The United States is directing military operations in Syria with Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia at a control center in Adana about 60 miles from the Syrian border, which is also home to the American air base in Incirlik. The Program by President Obama to have the CIA acquire heavy weapons at a facility in Benghazi to be sent to Turkey and onward to Syria is the newest challenge that Putin cannot allow to go unanswered. It was the involvement of Ambassador Chris Stevens in the arms trade that may have contributed to his murder; and the Russians are not hesitating to remind the United States and Europeans that their dealings with the various Moslem extremists is a very dangerous game.
The Russians are backing their determination to block another regime change by positioning and manning an advanced air defense system in what is becoming the Middle East casino. Putin is betting that NATO will not risk in Syria the cost that an air operation similar to what was employed over Libya will impose. Just in case Russia’s determination is disregarded and Putin’s bluff is called, Surface to surface Iskander missiles have been positioned along the Jordanian and Turkish frontiers. They are aimed at a base in Jordan operated by the United States to train rebels and at Patriot Missile sites and other military facilities in Turkey.
Putin is certain that he is holding the winning hand in this very high stakes poker game. An offshore naval task force, the presence of Russian air defense forces, an electronic intelligence center in latakia, and the port facilities at Tardus will guarantee the independence of the enclave. As the supplier of sixty percent of Turkey’s natural gas, Moscow does have leverage that Ankara will not be able to ignore; and Ankara well knows that gas is one of Putin’s diplomatic weapons.
When the Turks and U.S see that there is little chance of removing Al-Assad, they will have no option other than to negotiate a settlement with him; and that would involve Russia as the protector and the mediator. That would establish Russia’s revived standing as a Mediterranean power; and Putin could declare confidently that “Russia is back.” After that, the Russians will be free to focus upon their real interests in the region.
And what is Russia’s real interest? Of course, it is oil and gas and the power that control of them can bring.
(20 votes)
- advertisements -
»
- 16861 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:
- Stratfor's Geopolitical Intelligence Guidance For The Week Of February 20, 2011
- Guest Post: Forgotten Treasure: Unconventional Oil In The Middle East
- As Anger Over Russian Syria Veto Mounts, Putin "Briefly" Leaves Europe In The Cold
- Mystery Sponsor Of Weapons And Money To Syrian Mercenary "Rebels" Revealed
- Guest Post: Russia Claims New Arctic Hydrocarbon Finds Effectively Double Nations Reserves
So I was talking about the Talmud and stooge was being a...stooge?
In a nutshell, the Talmud is the Rabbinical interpretation of the Torah. It's encyclopaedic in size and scope, with twelve volumes of incomprehensible rules, regulations and dictates.
Orly said:
No.
I know that following a threaded discussion can be difficult, so let me help you out.
You initially made a statement which you indicated as being from the Torah. Without giving a more specific citation, determining what you were talking about would require further research on the part of the reader.
My comment was not a response to your statement, but to locosus, indicated by the demarcation "locosus said" as seen below:
------------------------------
locosus said:
No, no it's not.
Ummm, no.
------------------------------
Following that, you (Orly) said:
Using something known as "internet" it is possible for the sufficiently motivated person to make such determinations independently.
There is a site called wikipedia which can be helpful for such purposes. A cursory perusal indicates that the term Torah most often refers to the first five books of the Tanakh, as peter4805 indicated in his comment.
With some differences, mainly depending on the specific denomination, the Tanakh is what Christians refer to as the Old Testament, as it predates the birth of Christ.
Also from wikipedia, we learn that the Talmud is a textual compendium of both Judaism's oral law as well as rabbinic opinion. The oldest part of this written collection dates to around 200 AD. Certainly some of the oral law predates Christ, but the Talmud also has contents which originate in the centuries following Christ's time on earth.
Logic dictates that Christ would not have railed against something before its creation.
I hope this helps.
Also, you might want to look into this internet thing.
:D
Orly:
"The Koran and the Torah both state that it is okay to lie, cheat and steal from someone who is not akin to you."
any references from Quran...
Let not believers make friends with infidels in preference to the faithful - he that does this has nothing to hope for from Good - except in self-defense. God admonishes you to fear Him: for to God shall all return.
Quran 3:28; "The Imrans,"
God's curse be upon the infidels! Evil is that for which they have bartered away their souls. To deny God's own revelation, grudging that He should reveal His bounty to whom He chooses from among His servants! They have incurred God's most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers.
Quran 2:89-2:90, "The Cow,"
When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.
Quran 9:5; "Repentance,"
Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.
Quran 48:29, "Victory,"
From http://www.truthbeknown.com/islamquotes.htm#.US3TXKLU--k
I mean, why can't we all just get along?
"/
Thanks for the reply Orly, but what im requested was, references, whcih should support your claim: "Quaran teaches its followers to Lie, Cheat & Steal.."
Honestly i could not find any of the 03 in the references you have presented here. As per Quran these are the traits of the Non Believers.
"Among the People of the Book are some who, if entrusted with a hoard of gold, will (readily) pay it back; others, who if entrusted with a single silver coin, will not repay it unless thou constantly stoodest demanding because they, say "There is no call on us (to keep faith) with these ignorant (pagans)." But they tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it. (75) Nay?Those that keep their plighted faith and act aright?verily Allah loves those who act aright. (76) As for those who sell the faith they owe to Allah and their own solemn plighted word for a small price, they shall have no portion in the Hereafter: nor will Allah (deign to) speak to them or look at them on the Day of Judgment, nor will He cleanse them (of sin); they shall have a grievous penalty. (77) There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues; (as they read) so that you would think it is a part of the Book but it is no part of the Book; and they say "That is from Allah" but it is not from Allah: it is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (78)"
Quran 3:(75-78); "Al-E-Imran"
From http://www.quranexplorer.com/Quran/Default.aspx
Kinda funny how the substitution of words can change the whole context. I have a Qur'an given to me by a friend. The term "Infidel" originated in the Catholic church during the crusades.
Quran 3:28; "The Imrans
Actually states, unbeliever not infidel.
Is that so different from 2 Corinthians 6:14?
Many things will be lost in translation.
My reference is a side by side Arabic/English translation.
Now for a little levity. There was quite the brouhaha in my state when the Islamic community offered up their holy book to our state legislature. Some accepted it, others outright rejected it. One Rep. that refused, rethunk that one & had a town hall meeting w/ the I. community. My son, 14 at the time, went with our friends. He was the only Non-Muslim & kid in the group. When the rep opened up for Q & A, he asked & got the mans explaination for the rejection of their gift. He then asked the rep if he "accepted" the Islamic community's donations. Hard to believe a politician being speechless. It brought down the house.
My point being- and my ONLY point being- that Christianity makes no distinction between US and Them.
Islam and Judaism do. Why is that necessary?
End of story.
Why does everyone read what they want to read and NOT what I say?
Got an agenda much or are you really as open-minded as you claim to be? Yes, I'm talking to YOU.
No agenda here Orly. I have not a clue re: Judaism. Really can't say that I want one, given what limited knowledge I do have. It was your link & the term infidel that made the distinction. I merely stated from the reference material that I have with regards to your first reference chapter & verse.
My ONLY point being, that I read no such us/them disctinction as you claim in your post.
Can't answer for everyone.
Yes, I'm replyiing to YOU.
I'm not the one that junked you.
Kill the spirit and you can sell them tons of worthless shit to try and fill the void. Destroy their true god identity and you can make them rally around a flag for identity. Banish innate morality and you can make war something everyone is ok with.
It is a war on all religions and spirituality, so the material world can be profited from.
Sun Tzu: "It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle".
Know the mind of your enemy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-_rZLvMxxY
Bush senior was CIA. He should have been excluded in the American mind from being President if only because he was previously the top cop.
Know your enemy, indeed.
@ Americans in general: Did you really think that you could let your government suppress and oppress half a planet and that it wouldn't come back at you?! No need to answer that, here's a video that best shows exactly what has returned. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15F4Xp3NaBo
Remember my quote for this decade: "If ‘War is an extension of Politics by other means’ then, Politics is an extension of Economics by other means and further, Economics is an extension of Servitude by other means. We go to war today so we create servitude in others tomorrow. Politics, Economics, Warfare, Servitude; they’re all manifestations of the same fundamental flaw in the Human Psyche, that Control is a cure for Fear."
What's now returned to America? Political oppression, Economic oppression, a Cold War on the public, and Servitude.....fear and control has returned.
Fear, which for 70 years has been the largest export from America, has returned home. That's all.
Know your enemy!
Nations rise and fall in predictable patterns. The USA took the baton from the UK who was held in check by Spain and France for world domination. Who will hold the USA in check? IMO, the USA's story will be similar to Rome in that it will be unable to sustain the projection of its power as its economic decline accelerates. Rome's fall was not all that sudden. It incrementally broke apart into pieces as it could no longer afford to maintain an effective military presence in outlying provinces. I think that, eventually, the USA will be lucky to hold onto Guam, Hawaii, Alaska or Texas.
re lucius
world power passed from the French to the British in 1759 in the battle near Quebec City and in 1956 from the British to the Americans during the Suez War
"What do you give a Govt that's taken everything?", "When Dreams Come Due", by John Galt
Maybe not. The Russian made huge investments in Egypt and Iraq and lost. Propping up an hereditary dictatorship in Syria that can't even protect its own defense minister and his generals doesn't seem like a wise investment.
Why not? It's better to have Assad in charge than the kooks who are now running Libya.
Maybe, but Assad's regime looks to have 'jumped the shark' or gone "Humpty Dumpty'. He's finished.
enlighten us as to why-if Putin has Assad's back the Europeans damn well won't raise a finger(unless they like freezing to death w/no nat gas)and with no oil big bully Uncle Sam won't touch it w/ a 10 foot pole-other than arming a few crazed Taliban.
The Europeans aren't overthrowing Assad. The Syrian people ( with some outside Sunni help) are.
It's a travelling circus from Libya and Lebanon, the next destination can booked...
The Americans are overthrowing Assad and using dupes to do their fighting. Do you really think the Syrians are doing the fighting? If so, I have some beachfront property in the Sahara I would like you to consider.
Truth is, Putin has his fingers in the Cyprus pie and if he pulls the plug, the entire European "experiment" goes down in flames.
That's his real bargaining chip.
care to elaborate? Never heard that one before.
Rich Russian oligarchs hold the cards in Cyprus debt. They are owed big time.
What's Germany and Europe going to do about it?
http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/2012/11/4/the-bailout-of-russian-bla...
"The BND report concluded that this “black money” amounted to €26 billion—about 150% of the country’s GDP. Money that the banks had plowed into Greek sovereign bonds and the housing bubble that came with a nationwide title-deed scandal of phenomenal proportions..."
_________________
"Otherwise, Cyprus would be the first domino to topple, as the cliché goes, or the second, if Greece were allowed to go first, with mega-consequences that would ultimately take down the entire universe."
"Pull it!" -- Mr. Silverstein
stfu -quit listening to Bill Crystal and those morons at the Weekly Standard
Someday, when you die, you will stop believing liars.
It's a hard thing to do, but I think you can pull it off when you reach room temperature
Outside help is coming from the US taxpayer vis a vie CIA arms transfers to Sunni "Al Qaeda" elements.
So Russia should just pull out of the Middle East and let USSA/Isreal have it ? I'm sure that'd work out great for them and their interests. You must work at the Pentagon sangell.
Uh oh Bozo..
So, how much foreign policy was learned exactly, at the community organizer level again??
Why is the Bear suddenly interested in the ME after a decade of US/NATO building bases along its southern border?
Did they wait until the West was bankrupt/corrupt/exhausted?
Good question. When we invaded Iraq, Russia was still trying to recover from the economic mess Putin had inherited when he took office. Russia also was behind in their weapons technology. But now things have changed, and Putin seems to be standing up to the Western Central Bankers and also Israel. Both are bold moves.
Russia and Kazakhstan agree on joint air defense system
Pakistan hands management of Gwadar port to China. China to build rail link, boots on the ground
Keep your eye on the ball
You can bet the Indian Defense Minister is.
It's too late now .
The stupid fuckers have been outplayed by China and Russia.
The usual rubbish here on ZH - russian air-defence systems pose a threat but by NO MEANS does it do more than add a few days of SEAD missions to the USAF/USN - It's one thing having the launchers it's quite another maintaining the radar network and C4I required to make them effective - once power has gone, comms networks have gone, the IADS search and fire-control radars stick out like sore thumbs and get whacked really quickly by standoff munitions.
Russia might well have an ulterior motive in the region that relates entirely to its own precarious position as a hydrocarbon exporter (precarious because their gas market might take a big hit from shale developments) - they don't want the last bastions of opposition to the US in the ME to fall because the present situation with Iran locked out of energy markets probably suits them down to the ground, not to mention the fact that were Iran to modernise it could raise daily production to similar volumes as Saudi Arabia.
In other words, Russia can support whichever interests in the region result in prolonged instability and the necessary pricing in of risk on oil futures. I'm sure they like having captive markets for their weapon-systems too, especially since China has been undercutting most of its third-world customers with cheap knock-offs of extant Russian weapons.
N
as many have pointed out ( along with daily reality) do you think their only weapons are military?
I think it may be because of the Golden Rule....
He who holds the gold, makes the rule....
Putin must have been watching Aljazeera when the anchor "mistook" Damascus for Sochi or something.
"Putin is certain that he is holding the winning hand in this very high stakes poker game."
Obama matching wits with Putin?...lol.
The soft social working, novice golfer, the genuflecting mama's jean wearing, the world is going to fucking end if I don't get more tax revenue for my unicorn dreams of grandeur and my old lady doesn't deliver the Oscar trophy for a movie about heroic action I refused to take myself, I'm going to throw a hissy fit...
(ahem, sorry, community orgainizer) against a cold, calculating, former KGB head?
Where is the betting window?
Ya gotta like dem oddz. Press yer bets!
shit that would be really funny if he weren't the ass and we weren't the butt
hillary got her ass handed to her there. now its kerrys turn lol
What I can't figure out is if Putin is playing his role as he is told by his handlers or if he is a cowboy business man with some of that old school KGB pride to stick it to the west in what others have called a chess match. Maybe both...? Help me out here, does Putin report to anyone?
Putin is accountable to the Orthodox church. Don't laugh. This goes back a long ways, to Constantinople and Rome before that.
Okay, Ray. I'll bite.
Sez who?
Sez me. But do your own research. The Moscow Patriarchate has said that it would oppose efforts to be named the official state religion of Russia, but not many Russians would argue that it is the de facto state religion, and that the state is compelled to consult the church in ethical matters (which include war). There are other arragements like this, Philippines, for example with Catholic church. If you read the history of Orthodoxy, (not as written by Jews) you will understand why.
Raymond +1xxx
Fully share your point of view. Came to that conclusion after few years of reading sources.
Currently we are at war between New british empire (UK, US, IS, JP, Saudis etc...) against Russia + China (+Iran)
Strategic points of pain: Jap-CHi, ME - syria, Iran, palestine, egypt, india-pak, South am - malvinas (secret submarine base in south island)
EU in the middle. India, Pak - drifting east. South Am - drifting to RU-CHI.
US is totally under control via british agents (POTUS - CIA, FED, Media, Neocons in Pentagon, Israel lobby-senate, Brzezinski - british agent etc...)
Very interesting reading - Igor Panarin, read in goog translate:
http://translate.google.cz/translate?hl=cs&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.x-libri.ru%2Felib%2Fpanrn000%2F00000045.htm