26 January 2016By Eyad Abu Shakra
Pictures of an emaciated man from the besieged Syrian town of Madaya in the
Rif Dimashq Governorate, who died after failing to exchange his car for some
food, may best reflect the latest development of Syria's debacle which
welcomes 2016 with new and old baggage that threatens the Middle East with the
worst.
This may not be a suitable introduction to what to expect in the Middle East
in 2016, but any optimistic talk given the current situation is outright
stupid; as the region, whether we like or not, is in a real, multi-faceted
state of war.
Any ballistic missile launched from the Yemeni mountain hideouts of Iranian
backed Houthis and former dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh targeting civilians in
the towns and villages of southern Saudi Arabia proves that the GCC military
intervention on the side of Yemen's legitimate government has been more than
necessary; even though, some may say, it has come a bit late.
In the meantime, in Syria, carrying out the plan hatched and imposed by Iran's
IRGC for population exchange involving the Sunni population of Damascus'
western countryside and the Shi'ite enclaves of Aleppo and Idlib Provinces
with the military support of Iran's subservient Iraqi, Lebanese and Afghan
Shi'ite militias and the Russian air force, any peddling of a ‘peaceful
settlement' becomes a travesty.
As for Iraq, the role given to and played by the Shi'a dominated ‘People's
Rally' which at present forms the backbone of field armed forces claiming
legitimacy, leaves no doubt that Iran now controls the political and security
processes in Baghdad. The battle to ‘liberate' the town of Ramadi by driving
out ISIS, in all declared and undeclared circumstances, in addition to Baghdad
taking the issue of a military Turkish presence in northern Iraq to the Arab
League, are further signs that the ‘new Iraq' created by Washington in 2003
under the pretext of non-existing arms of mass destruction is barely
distinguishable from the ‘new Syria' whose map is being drawn by Washington,
Moscow and Tehran who use the war against ISIS as a pretext.
Now free of American sanctions and military pressure, Iran is now behaving
like another Israel but much larger and even more ambitious and expansionist;
it is hell-bent on re-drawing the borders of its neighbouring countries,
deciding the limits of their sovereignty, fabricating and imposing their
leaders and then lecturing about ‘human rights', defining ‘terrorism' the way
it pleases, expropriating Islam and offering its ‘services' to world powers as
a regional client.
The latest has been the long expected threat to Saudi Arabia after Riyadh
executed a number of extremists (the vast majority of whom are Sunnis)
convicted of involvement in terrorist crimes. Iran's reaction would have been
expected had it come from a country that does not carry out the death sentence
against political and sectarian opposition activists; but coming from a
country that ranks second (after China) in the executions' league table and
and accuses Saudi Arabia and other GCC countries of aiding and abetting
terrorism and Al Qaeda-style terrorism, such a reaction means that Iran is
actually in a state of war with its Gulf neighbours. Indeed, it may not take
the Turks and Kurds too long to begin to realise the threat of Iran's
ambitions to their own territories.
There are several question marks surrounding the future of the Middle East as
we welcome in 2016; but while many argue about whether Russia's military
intervention in Syria is intended to contain Iran's overreach or compliments
its regional project which seems to enjoy American, Israeli and European
approval, we are clearly witnessing two salient facts.
The first is that Russia's political and military presence in the eastern
Mediterranean is now a fact that has negative repercussions on Turkey and its
regional influence. Washington's policies and recent stances point to its deep
dislike of Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and its efforts to weaken
and undermine him in parallel with its support of Iran's ascendency and
Kurdish secessionist endeavours. This is what one can read from NATO's
reluctant sympathy with Moscow following threats to the Turks after the
Russian jet fighter incident as well as the generous and continuous American
support of the Kurds which is hardly comparable with the pitiful support we
have been told has been received by Syria's moderate opposition.
The second fact is that as the US presidential elections campaign gathers
momentum, certain ‘specialised' quarters begin their own campaign of – what I
reckon –well-planned political and even partisan ‘leaks'. The Wall Street
Journal reports about an unsuccessful coup against Syria's Bashar Al-Assad
were pretty exciting, and would surely lessen the pressure on Barack Obama in
particular, as well as that on the Democrats in next November's presidential,
congressional and gubernatorial elections. Definitely more exciting is what
Seymour Hersh – a ‘friend' of Al-Assad and Hezbollah – has reported about
''intelligence sharing'' between the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defence
Intellingence Agency with their Russian, Israeli and German counterparts in
order to keep the Syrian dictator in power ostensibly without the knowledge of
the White House. One reason why such ‘info' has been made public by Hersh may
have been to exonerate Obama of GOP accusations of hesitation, betrayal of the
Syrians and giving in to Moscow and Tehran.
The logical question here, besides who the main beneficiary is, must be ''why
now?'' Given the present military situation in Syria, most of what Hersh has
reported is true regardless of whether one believes in ‘conspiracy theories'
or not. But why now? After the realities on the ground– the secret about
''intelligence sharing'' is divulged? How is it possible to continue with fake
declarations, deceitful conferences, manoeuvres and training and arming
programmes for two years?
In any case, the acute and defining crises and problems the Middle East is
facing at present merit realistic actions without illusions. The ‘hot spots'
like Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, and of course Palestine, provide early tests
of ability after intentions of all concerned have become clear.
If the Russians carry on with their ‘blitz' in Syria in order to radically
overturn the equation before the promised peace talks, Americans continue to
regard Haider Al-Abadi's government in Iraq as an avant-garde in the ‘war
against terror', and Iran swims deeper and deeper in the blood of innocent
citizens of Yemen, GCC states, Iraq and the Levant through its Houthis and
other local militant henchmen, the victory in the ‘war against terror' will be
costlier and will take a very long time.
Eyad Abu Shakra is the managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat. He has been with
the newspaper since 1978.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments