West Asia News and Discussions

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG wrote:ShyamD,

Maliki is not fully backing Assad. How do you come to these conclusions? Did your "source" :roll: tell you? It's a balancing act between his own constituency, Iraqi Sunni demographic as a whole, Iran, US, and Syria. Stability in Syria is in his interest. If the government falls, he would probably want it to be done in a well structured way which keeps Sunni extremism on the Syrian side of the border.
Balance is just for public show. He is doing things even at the risk of igniting a regional war.
He is fully behind Asad.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

FSA takes control of coastal village 22km from Assad’s hometown, Qirdaha. #Syria

Blast followed by attacks against republican guard in Damascus in the last 1 hour.

@AP: Turkish PM aide: Turkey has no intension of declaring war on Syria, shelling is a warning. http://t.co/BwaqJBg6 - VW
---------
Something I spoke about last year - king Abdullah curbing powers of the religious police:
@Yahoo: Saudi Arabia's feared religious police losing some key powers, including arrests, investigations and raiding houses: http://t.co/Znagnt28
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

@WashingtonPoint: RT“@besasley: English text of parliament's resolution "#Turkish Parliament passes #Syria cross-border motion http://t.co/uHTukLFA

Deputy pm says its just deterrence .

Syria has apologised but shelling resumed again
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by ramana »

Nightwatch on Turkey-Syria
Turkey-Syria: A Turkish woman and her three children were among the five persons killed by a Syrian mortar shell that hit the town on Akcakale in Turkey.

Turkey responded with artillery fire against Syrian military installations in northeastern Syria. This was the first time Turkey has fired into Syria during the 18-month-long uprising against President Bashar al-Asad.

In a statement, the office of Turkey's Prime Minister Erdogan said, "Our armed forces in the border region responded immediately to this abominable attack in line with their rules of engagement ….Turkey will never leave unanswered such kinds of provocation by the Syrian regime against our national security."

Syria said it was looking into the origin of the cross-border shelling that hit Akcakale. Syrian Information Minister Omran Zoabi said, "Syria offers its sincere condolences to the families of the victims and to our friends the Turkish people."

Comment: Turkey is looking for a reason to create a safehaven for Syrian refuges inside Syrian, rather than Turkey. Today's minor exchange of fire provides a justification for Turkey to create a buffer zone, ostensibly to protect Turkey, but actually to help the Syrian opposition, which has shown repeatedly that it cannot hold ground. With Turkish artillery cover, it might be able to create a secure base near the border town of Idlib…maybe.
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by rsingh »

IMO Turkey is playing dangerous game thinking NATO will back it.NATO is to help them, that is not the problem. What are they going to do with bearded guys who have tendency to spread the shit afterward.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by ramana »

If Turkey gets bogged down in Syria it will have huge consequences for all of them.

ShyamD, Again we need to step back and see the big picture.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Agnimitra »

ramana wrote:If Turkey gets bogged down in Syria it will have huge consequences for all of them.

ShyamD, Again we need to step back and see the big picture.
Turkey won't get bogged down militarily. They're doing a Paki-like 1965 hoping NATO will jump in. But if NATO doesn't, then they will declare that their shelling has recreated the buffer zone.

Meanwhile, from the Syrian/Iranian side, provoking Turkey into aggression will always serve to expose their deep dependence on the West, and by extension, with "Zionists", in order to win the Arab street. So to balance that out Turkey must regularly say provocative things to Israel, thus ratcheting up regional tensions and getting more radicalised internally as well, progressively sucked into the emerging Islamist scene in WA/NA. So Turkey won't get bogged down militarily, but it is already getting bogged down ideologically.

From this maelstrom, I suppose the West expects Kurdish nectar to rise to the surface. Then it will be a race for which party gets to hog that potion - Persia or the West.
Sept 29, 2012: Damascus to Ankara: We’ll Arm Every Kurdish Man with A Rocket
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by nakul »

India, Saudi Arabia To Discuss Joint Weapon Projects
India and Saudi Arabia will explore the joint development and production of weapons and equipment to control rising imports.
Antony led an official two-day visit to Saudi Arabia Feb. 13-14, heading a defense team that included Defence Secretary Shashi Kant Sharma; Lt. Gen. S.K. Singh, the Army vice chief; and Vice Adm. Satish Soni, the deputy Navy chief

An Indian Defence Ministry official said India and Saudi Arabia have decided to set up a panel to work out the path to defense cooperation.

“At the delegation-level talks, India and Saudi Arabia decided to set up a Joint Committee on Defence Cooperation to work out the contours of the relationship,” said Sitanshu Kar, a spokesman with the Defence Ministry.

India meets up to 70 percent of its weapon and equipment requirements through imports, and defense planners want to reduce that to less than 50 percent. India plans to spend about $100 billion on weapons and equipment during the next five years.

While no details on the proposed joint weapon development with Saudi Arabia are known, sources said the two countries have agreed in principle to boost joint ventures.

Antony and Salman Bin agreed to establish a joint committee to work out the details of future defense cooperation, including an agreement in the defense sector, said another Defence Ministry official.
Does anyone know more about this :?:
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Turkey can't do much without NATO backing, look at the map - Iraq, Iran and Russia surround it - All can cause some trouble if they want to. Syria's allies are also keen to prevent a regional conflict here - Ahmadinejad's number 2 turned up in Ankara in an unannounced visit and Russia is tellin the Syrians to apologise which they did.

You see the Syrians were trying to conduct some cross border attacks last month from Kurdish territory to draw the turks away from the western provinces who were giving cover for FSA.

If we are seeing Turkish intervention we will see just the 4 sector safe zones I posted in April. Most probably just 2 sectors which were deemed to be the safest to launch a safe zone. But even then Erdogan is being ultra cautious and saying he wants US nod

Meanwhile another shell landed in turkey
Last edited by shyamd on 05 Oct 2012 00:22, edited 1 time in total.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

ramana wrote:If Turkey gets bogged down in Syria it will have huge consequences for all of them.

ShyamD, Again we need to step back and see the big picture.
Big picture IMO is that if a regional war breaks out - Iran/Iraq and Russia could get sucked in. Then what happens is NATO in theory will have to help them. But I don't think Russia or the Turks for that matter will get involved in something like this - turkey isn't going to throw all their development be thrown into the dustbin by a war.

Erdogan is just filled with rhetoric and words. No one takes him seriously. But Syrian crisis is costing the Turks a lot of money and instability. That's what is making him ask US for air support and Euro and Arab alliance along with Turks will do the rest.

The prize here is Aleppo. This is the most anti FSA city and the trend runs different to other cities and it's the main economic hub. If the Turks launch a safe zone (just 10km). They can use that to win Aleppo.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

shyamd wrote:
RoyG wrote:ShyamD,

Maliki is not fully backing Assad. How do you come to these conclusions? Did your "source" :roll: tell you? It's a balancing act between his own constituency, Iraqi Sunni demographic as a whole, Iran, US, and Syria. Stability in Syria is in his interest. If the government falls, he would probably want it to be done in a well structured way which keeps Sunni extremism on the Syrian side of the border.
Balance is just for public show. He is doing things even at the risk of igniting a regional war.
He is fully behind Asad.
What else is he doing? You just keep saying "he is fully behind assad". The fact is he is dealing with a very large Sunni demographic in his own country. It wouldn't make any sense for him to fully back anyone. His goal is to prevent a spill over into his country.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Cash weapons & men
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

shyamd wrote:Cash weapons & men
Cash, weapons, and men? Is there evidence for this state sponsored backing?
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

They'll make a big hoo ha in the press when the time is right. For example there were articles in the NYT and WaPo about Iraqis turning blind eye to Iranian over flights with weapons even after appeals to stop them. So earlier this week Iraqis just did a public show of searching an Iranian aircraft. The Iraqi MoI nowadays is starting to work in sync with Iranians.

Iraqis are looking to get some Russian gear soon.

There is news in the public and the real news that you can only find with diplomats and security officials

-----------------
@WashingtonPoint: A good summary of how d retaliation decision taken by #Turkish administration immediately after #Syria hit Turkish town http://t.co/6M1n3fY4
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

shyamd wrote:They'll make a big hoo ha in the press when the time is right. For example there were articles in the NYT and WaPo about Iraqis turning blind eye to Iranian over flights with weapons even after appeals to stop them. So earlier this week Iraqis just did a public show of searching an Iranian aircraft. The Iraqi MoI nowadays is starting to work in sync with Iranians.

Iraqis are looking to get some Russian gear soon.

There is news in the public and the real news that you can only find with diplomats and security officials

-----------------
@WashingtonPoint: A good summary of how d retaliation decision taken by #Turkish administration immediately after #Syria hit Turkish town http://t.co/6M1n3fY4
Oh I see...so these "diplomats" and "security officials" are feeding you this information. Makes sense now.

Have they found anything on Iranian planes flying over Iraq? You're making an issue of something which isn't even proven to be true and using it as a smoking gun.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by brihaspati »

well, what if the disgruntled FSA [in the 80% or in the 20%?] did a potshot at the Turkic border to create the right excuses? shoot at the Turks, who will shoot inside - and then use the cover to advance. Good thinking! Ah the pleasure of classic Islamic tactics of war being applied on fellow Islamics!

Turkey is most reluctanct to get into war. But the "rebels+sponsors" have Turkey in a grip. If Erdogan doesnt handle this with less rhetoric - bye, bye Erdogan. The Turkish military can play this game very well in that case with its own home-grown nemesis.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Surya »

so these "diplomats" and "security officials" are feeding you this information. Makes sense now.
boss you got to understand - movers and shakers and those who mix with them or serve them have ample time to rush out and post the latest.
well, what if the disgruntled FSA [in the 80% or in the 20%?] did a potshot at the Turkic border to create the right excuses?
If?? when Time and liberal state of Qatars media are on the same side -- you know that its true :mrgreen:


The Hater
Y. Kanan
BRFite
Posts: 931
Joined: 27 Mar 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Y. Kanan »

brihaspati wrote:Turkey is most reluctanct to get into war.
Are they?

Erdogan and his clowns have been chafing at the bit for over a year.
pentaiah
BRFite
Posts: 1671
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by pentaiah »

Long live Curdistan, its now fermenting and will thicken through this Syrian adventure, compared to the AQ the Turkish Kurdistan PKK terror is peanuts yet unkil got Öcalan.

Until 1998, Öcalan was based in Syria. As the situation deteriorated in Turkey, the Turkish government openly threatened Syria over its support for the PKK.[citation needed] As a result of this, the Syrian government forced Öcalan to leave the country, but did not turn him over to the Turkish authorities.
Öcalan went to Russia first and from there moved to various countries, including Italy and Greece. In 1998 the Turkish government requested the extradition of Öcalan from Italy. He was at that time defended by the high-profile German attorney, Britta Böhler, who argued that he fought a legitimate struggle against the oppression of ethnic Kurds.
He was captured in Kenya on February 15, 1999, while being transferred from the Greek embassy to Jomo Kenyata international airport Nairobi, in an operation by the Millî İstihbarat Teşkilâtı with debatable help of CIA or Mossad.[29][30]The Greek consul who harboured him, George Costoulas, said that his life was in danger after the operation.[31]
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG wrote: Oh I see...so these "diplomats" and "security officials" are feeding you this information. Makes sense now.

Have they found anything on Iranian planes flying over Iraq? You're making an issue of something which isn't even proven to be true and using it as a smoking gun.
Firstly, I am fortunate enough to speak to people in the know

As for the planes - read the many articles on the subject yourself and you can decide whether it's true or not.

------------
Russian deal with Iraq I've been speaking about

#Russia to sign $5-billion defense contract with #Iraq http://t.co/jDTpZQ4e #arms #news

Apparently rumour is US may postpone F16 contract because the Iraqis are asking for some advanced gear from the Russians
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Syria keeping military 10 km away from Turkish border, report says
0
5 October 2012 / TODAY'S ZAMAN, İSTANBUL
The Syrian administration has told its military to keep aircraft at least 10 kilometers away from the Turkish border and to avoid artillery fire near the border one day after the Turkish government received a mandate from Parliament for military operations in foreign countries, a news report said on Friday.
Turkey's ntvmsnbc.com news portal claimed, citing “reliable sources,” that the Syrian regime had ordered all kinds of military aircraft, including warplanes and helicopters, to stay at least 10 kilometers from the Turkish border. The report also said a number of Syrian warplanes which approached within 10 kilometers of the Turkish border despite this warning had been ordered to turn back immediately by Syrian authorities.

Turkish artillery bombarded Syrian military targets for a second day on Thursday, responding to the mortar fire that killed five people the day before in the southeastern town of Akçakale.

The salvoes reportedly killed several Syrian soldiers, and Turkey's Parliament stepped up pressure on the political front by authorizing cross-border military action in the event of further aggression.

According to ntvmsnbc's report, Syria had ascertained that the Turkish artillery fire had killed 10 Syrian soldiers and damaged three tanks and two armored vehicles.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

shyamd wrote:
RoyG wrote: Oh I see...so these "diplomats" and "security officials" are feeding you this information. Makes sense now.

Have they found anything on Iranian planes flying over Iraq? You're making an issue of something which isn't even proven to be true and using it as a smoking gun.
Firstly, I am fortunate enough to speak to people in the know

As for the planes - read the many articles on the subject yourself and you can decide whether it's true or not.

------------
Russian deal with Iraq I've been speaking about

#Russia to sign $5-billion defense contract with #Iraq http://t.co/jDTpZQ4e #arms #news

Apparently rumour is US may postpone F16 contract because the Iraqis are asking for some advanced gear from the Russians
Oh yes, we know...your sources are a treasure trove of info...wouldn't want that channel drying up!

I've asked you to furnish evidence for state sponsored support and all you give me is some vague theory about Iranian overflights. I've read all the news articles. I'll ask you again, have they found anything? Better ask your "source".

It's a balancing act. The bulk of Iraq's arms still come the US.

Here is a more balanced view of Iraq's objectives. Reinforces what I've been saying earlier. A chaotic collapse isn't in his interest and the last thing he wants to do is take a one sided position.
Iraq’s Maliki toes a delicate line between Iran and U.S.

Published on Sunday September 30, 2012
Patrick Markey, and Suadad al-Salhy
Reuters

BAGHDAD—Iraq’s move to inspect Iranian aircraft flying to Syria may appease the United States but also shows how crisis in Damascus has pushed Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki into an ever more delicate balancing act between his two main allies.

When he faced a parliamentary revolt this year, he could count on Tehran to pull strings of influence over restive fellow Shiite politicians in Iraq’s majority community that saw the Iraqis quickly fall in line again behind the Shiite prime minister.

But after the United States complained publicly that Iran was using Iraqi airspace to fly arms and men to help President Bashar Assad fight western-backed rebels, Iraq’s government has told Washington it will inspect Iranian flights at random.

Nine years after U.S. forces ousted Iraq’s Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein, and nine months after they finally pulled out of the country, Maliki is heavily reliant on Tehran, Washington’s enemy. He leans on Iran for political support at home and for backing in a Sunni-dominated region where he has few friends.

But he still needs the Americans, too — for military aid, in part, but also as Iraq seeks global investment and trading access for an oil industry it is struggling to rebuild.

And all the while, with the Syrian civil war inflaming historic confrontations in the Middle East between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and between Arab and Persian, Maliki is trying to carve out space for Iraq’s — and his own — interests.

“We are trying to take an independent position, based on our national interests,” Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari told Reuters recently in explaining Iraq’s Syria policy.

“We are trying to differentiate ourselves. Things are not black and white.”

Iraq says it has a policy of non-interference in Syria — but stays close to Tehran’s position by refusing to endorse western and Arab League demands for the removal of Assad, whose Alawite minority faith is an offshoot of Shiite Islam.

For Maliki, who once found refuge in Syria and Iran as a Shiite Islamist activist fleeing Saddam, a defeat for Assad that put Damascus under the control of Sunni Islamists could add to the threat he already faces from a Sunni insurgency blamed for the kind of attacks that killed more than 30 Iraqis on Sunday.

“We reject attempts to bring down the regime by force, because it will leave a wider crisis in the region,” Maliki has said.

That concern, rather than any pressure from Tehran, appears to drive the Iraqi premier, diplomats and Iraqi officials say.

“Maliki is fundamentally looking after Maliki’s interests,” one diplomat involved in the region said.

“Relations with Iran may be part of that. But I don’t think Iran’s interest will trump Maliki’s domestic interests.”

Maliki is keenly aware of the benefits of keeping Iran on board. Tehran helped secure his premiership into a second term in 2010 by persuading fractious Shiite parties to join forces and outmanoeuvre Sunnis, Kurds and independent groups.

At the same time, Washington’s sway over a leader whom it once saw as more mindful of U.S. interests than other Shiite candidates had faded, even before the troop withdrawal. Maliki, aware of nationalist sensitivity, said Iraq could not support a small U.S. force staying on by extending troops’ legal immunity.

But Washington still has weight it can pull with Maliki, as the appeasing move on Iranian flights to Syria demonstrated.

“Maliki will never risk his relationship with the U.S.,” said Iraqi Shiite lawmaker Amir al-Kinani. “But he will send a message saying they must support him to stay in power.

“This has nothing to do with religion, for Maliki or for Iran — it’s about interests.”

Washington has allowed $2 billion in weapons sales to Iraq in 2012 alone, including a recently completed purchase of U.S.-made tanks. Baghdad will soon take delivery of more than 30 F-16 fighters that will be the backbone of its new air force.

U.S. military officers engaged in training programs also still operate out of the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.

With President Barack Obama campaigning for re-election, some in the United States have suggested pressing Iraq harder to distance itself from Iran. But U.S. diplomats are wary of exerting pressure that might have the opposite effect on Maliki. The State Department rejected a call for aid to Baghdad to be threatened if Iraq did not block Iranian flights to Syria.

“Maliki has a variety of reasons for wanting Assad to stay in power. The fact Iran shares this preference will tend to promote stronger relations,” said Stephen Biddle, professor at George Washington University.

“That does not mean Maliki will ignore U.S. preferences. He wants help wherever he can get it, and the United States can provide arms of the kind and quality Iranians cannot.”

Syria’s crisis, and how the increasingly sectarian turmoil develops there, remains a major question mark over how Maliki will manage future relations with Washington and Tehran.

Already Maliki’s relationship with Assad is complex.

At the height of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, Iraqi Shiite leaders slammed Damascus for letting foreign militants, including Al Qaeda fighters, slip over their desert border. Members of Saddam’s Baath Party, long estranged from the Syrian wing of the movement led by Assad, also found refuge in Syria.

But Maliki has since developed a more pragmatic relationship with Damascus, not least as the prospect grows of Syria falling to a hardline Sunni revolt that could the reignite Iraq.

How Maliki manages Syria now depends on whether — or how — Assad’s regime falls. More western and Arab intervention in Syria that might ease Assad out in favour of a broad-based Syrian government could be a relief for Baghdad.

But a messy collapse, and the rise of a hostile Sunni regime next door, may drive a threatened Maliki closer to Iran; Tehran in turn may increase its focus on Baghdad if it loses Damascus.

“I suspect the Iranians are going to be very dismayed by the collapse of Syria and the loss of their ally and will redouble their efforts in Iraq,” said Kenneth Pollack at the Brookings Institute’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington.

“Both those things are probably going to make it harder for Maliki to chart an independent course.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/artic ... an-and-u-s
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by brihaspati »

So we have quick news posting on how Syrian forces have been ordered away from the Turkish border, how Turkish Islamist dominated parliament has stepped up pressures on the "political front" [hmm - they are the "political front" aren't they?].

Any news about any domestic public reaction to the muscular military threat by the Islamist Parliament - come across by people while searching for how Turkish parliament has showed its muscle?
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by brihaspati »

Euro source:
http://www.euronews.com/2012/10/05/anti ... nst-syria/
Turkey’s prime minister says his country has no intention of going to war with Syria, as protesters worried about an escalation of the cross-border violence marched through Ankara and Istanbul. In the capital there were some clashes between protesters and police.
The Russians have more to say:
http://rt.com/news/turkey-syria-shelling-dead-631/
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has called on to Damascus to make a public promise not to allow any further armed conflicts on the Turkish border. Lavrov said that Syria and Turkey must establish a reliable communication channel to settle border conflicts. Sergey Lavrov also informed that Damascus has already contacted Moscow on the matter of the border incident on Turkish border and assured the mortar shelling was a “tragic casualty.”

Russian FM expressed regret that the UN Security Council seems not to notice terrorist acts in Syria. “I cannot but remember the deplorable fact that our Western partners in the UN refuse to condemn terror acts taking place on Syrian soil,” Lavrov said.

A source in NATO [everyone has sources :lol: ]has revealed that at the current stage of the border conflict between alliance’s member Turkey and Syria the organization does not intend to bring its article on collective defense into play. Spokesperson for the US State Department Victoria Nuland has called on to Russia to “use its influence on the Assad regime” and said Washington will continue co-operating with Moscow in search of a solution to the Syrian crisis, which the US understands as transition of authority from President Bashar al-Assad.
[...]

The incident with alleged accidental mortar shelling is extremely untimely for the Syrian regime which has just managed to halt the trend towards further escalation of terrorist threat in the country. The latest reports from Syria suggest that the foreign-sponsored militants are suffering heavy losses as the regular army cleans up quarters in the cities and prevent mercenaries from intruding into Syria from neighboring countries, mostly from Turkey.
[...]
Turkey’s parliament is expected to decide on Thursday whether to allow the military operate on Syrian territory, as a law similar to the one regarding Iraqi Kurds may be adopted. Despite hawkish rhetoric, on Wednesday immediately after the mortar shelling incident in the Turkish town near the Syrian border, Turkish authorities are not absolutely sure they want to engage into a fully-fledged conflict with their southern neighbor.

An aide for Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan published a tweet on Thursday saying that “Turkey is not seeking war with Syria, though it prepares to defend its borders and is ready to repel an aggression.” “Surely a war can be prevented and Turkey intends to continue with politic and diplomatic initiatives,” assured Dr. Ibrahim Kalin.

The concerns of the Turkish political establishment are quite understandable. Eliminating Kurdish militants armed with handguns in Iraq is one thing, while dealing with regular Syrian army, equipped with modern air-defenses, multiple-launch rocket systems, assault helicopters, tanks, and up-to-date systems of radio-electronic warfare is an undertaking with unpredictable results and possible multiple casualties among Turkish servicemen.

The idea of possible warfare with Syria has met with strong opposition from Turkish web activists. The “no to war” campaign they initiated in Twitter soon became an international trend. The hashtag “savasahayir” (no to war) quickly spread beyond Turkish borders into global social networks.


­
‘Turkey’s Syria policy lacks support of its people’

­Jeremy Salt, professor of Middle Eastern Studies at Bilkent University, said that there was “no proof” that government forces had fired the mortar across the Turkish border.

He added that some were waiting for Turkey to act in retaliation to the attacks as they might stand to gain from the conflict. “There are several countries that are anxious for Turkey to take these actions. Qatar is one, Saudi Arabia is another. So they’ll be weighing up the costs and the benefits tomorrow,
” Professor Salt told RT. He concluded that given the “growing domestic opposition” to Turkey’s current policy on Syria, any decision to create a no-fly zone would be “extremely unpopular” with the Turkish people.

­Utku Cakirozer, Ankara Bureau chief of the Jumhuriet Turkish daily told RT that Turkey’s position of backing the Syrian opposition “created a huge risk” for the country. “I personally believe that the Turkish government’s position has risked this sort of unfortunate events on the border,” said Cakirozer. He added that the border attack was a “sad mistake of the Syrian army in their clashes with the opposition militia.” Cakirozer believes that although the Turkish government was pushing for regime change in Damascus, they would not go so far as to intervene with military force.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG. They'll obviously stop when the spotlight is on them - which was actually discussed in one of the articles which you say you read. As for evidence I obviously can't provide you with evidence of transfers of money. Weapons - well the fact that it is being raised by the US officials and that too at a senior level gives you an indication.

I am happy for you to believe its a balancing act. Time will tell.

Even Hezbollah is denying anything was happrning in Syria and they had no men there etc. But I guess someone has to ask why several members are dieing? Are the Israelis killing them?

-------------
Meanwhile both Syria and Turkey continue to exchange artillery fire
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

shyamd wrote:RoyG. They'll obviously stop when the spotlight is on them - which was actually discussed in one of the articles which you say you read. As for evidence I obviously can't provide you with evidence of transfers of money. Weapons - well the fact that it is being raised by the US officials and that too at a senior level gives you an indication.

I am happy for you to believe its a balancing act. Time will tell.

Even Hezbollah is denying anything was happrning in Syria and they had no men there etc. But I guess someone has to ask why several members are dieing? Are the Israelis killing them?

-------------
Meanwhile both Syria and Turkey continue to exchange artillery fire
You've sidestepped my question which is understandable because you have no evidence. I think it's a little obvious that you're overplaying the overflight theory. Look at the bigger picture. Of course, Hezbollah would get involved because Syria gives them financial and military assistance and they don't want to get squeezed by a radical Sunni state next door. Moreover, there is evidence that they've died in the public domain. The context is completely different from Iraq standing "fully behind Assad", which is sheer nonsense. These leaders don't live in your bubble of black and white.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG wrote: You've sidestepped my question which is understandable because you have no evidence.
Thats stating the obvious, how can I provide you with evidence of actual cash payments etc? But ask yourself where does Asad have the cash to fund his war now?
I think it's a little obvious that you're overplaying the overflight theory.
The overflight theory of transfer of weapons is actually very old - just ask the israelis. Its one of the major ways they transfer weapons.
Look at the bigger picture. Of course, Hezbollah would get involved because Syria gives them financial and military assistance and they don't want to get squeezed by a radical Sunni state next door. Moreover, there is evidence that they've died in the public domain. The context is completely different from Iraq standing "fully behind Assad", which is sheer nonsense. These leaders don't live in your bubble of black and white.
Of course nothing is black and white - thats why Maliki doesn't want to show the world and neither does Iran want to admit it is doing anything immoral in Syria (until very recently where they admitted they have "advisors") and same goes for Hezbollah - who were blurting all sorts of crap almost as if nothing going on there.

Just wait and see - happy to be proven wrong. I trust the info I get and its been pretty accurate so far.


--------------------
Iran Offers Plan, Dismissed by U.S., on Nuclear Crisis
By DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON — With harsh economic sanctions contributing to the first major protests in Iran in three years, Iranian officials have begun to describe what they call a “nine-step plan” to defuse the nuclear crisis with the West by gradually suspending the production of the uranium that would be easiest for them to convert into a nuclear weapon.

But the plan requires so many concessions by the West, starting with the dismantling of all the sanctions that are blocking oil sales and setting off the collapse of the Iranian currency, that American officials have dismissed it as unworkable. Nonetheless, Iranian officials used their visit to the United Nations last week to attempt to drum up support, indicating that the country’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is finally feeling the pressure.

“Within the intelligence community, I think it’s fair to say that there is split opinion about whether the upper level of the regime is getting seriously worried,” one senior intelligence official said when asked why the Iranians appeared to be backing away from their earlier stand that nothing would stop them from producing more medium-enriched uranium, which can be turned into bomb fuel in a matter of months.

“He’s erratic, and we’ve seen him walk up to the edge of deals before and walk away,” the official said, referring to Ayatollah Khamenei.

The Iranian plan is based on a proposal made to European officials in July. It essentially calls for a step-by-step dismantling of the sanctions while the Iranians end work at one of two sites where they are enriching what is known as “20 percent uranium.” Only when the Iranians reach step No. 9 — after all the sanctions are gone and badly depressed oil revenues have begun to flow again — would there be a “suspension” of the medium-enriched uranium production at the deep underground site called Fordow.

Obama administration officials say the deal is intended to generate headlines, but would not guarantee that Iran cannot produce a weapon. “The way they have structured it, you can move the fuel around, and it stays inside the country,” a senior Obama administration official said. “They could restart the program in a nanosecond. They don’t have to answer any questions from the inspectors” about evidence that they conducted research on nuclear weapons technology, but nonetheless would insist on a statement from the agency that all issues have been resolved.

“Yet we’re supposed to lift sanctions that would take years to reimpose, if we could get countries to agree,” the administration official said.

The United States has not put a formal offer on the table. But the outline of a way to a solution they described to Iranian officials before the summer is almost the mirror image of the Iranian nine-step proposal.

Under the American vision, Iran would halt all production of its 20 percent enriched uranium immediately, ship the existing stockpile out of the country and close the Fordow plant. That would defuse the threat of an Iranian “breakout” to produce a weapon, leaving the Iranians with a stockpile of low-enriched uranium that would require far more lengthy processing to weaponize.

Then the United States and its allies would offer some cooperation on civilian nuclear projects, and would agree not to add new sanctions at the United Nations Security Council. But the sanctions squeezing the Iranian economy would remain in place until a final deal is reached.

To the Iranians, this is a prescription for government change, and they insist it will fail. “I ask you sincerely, can anyone go to war with Iran,” even an economic war, and “come out a victor?” President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said last week during a meeting with a half-dozen authors who have written books about Iran. “Why does the U.S. believe she can prevail?”

Yet Mr. Ahmadinejad declined to talk about the current negotiations. Instead, to the astonishment of Iranian officials, he argued at the session that the Iranian people were better off economically than they had been when he came to office. Since Mr. Ahmadinejad’s return to Tehran, Iranian officials have begun looking for any signs that their proposal, although rejected by Washington, could represent the basis of a conversation.

So far, it is difficult to find much overlap between the American and Iranian proposals. Both countries want to retain leverage, so the Iranians believe it is essential to keep the capability to produce uranium, and they reject any proposals to dismantle the nuclear infrastructure they have built, which they say is for civilian use. Similarly, the Americans, Europeans and Israelis believe they must maintain the constant pressure of sanctions.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made it clear that the United States had no intention of relaxing the sanctions — particularly now, just as they show the first sign of forcing Iran’s leaders to rethink the costs of their nuclear program.

“We have always said that we had a dual-track approach to this, and one track was trying to put pressure on the Iranian government to come to the negotiating table,” Mrs. Clinton told reporters. But she said it was Iran’s own mismanagement of its economy, more than the sanctions, that deserved “responsibility for what is going on inside Iran.”

“And that is who should be held accountable,” Mrs. Clinton said. “And I think that they have made their own government decisions, having nothing to do with the sanctions that have had an impact on the economic conditions inside the country.”
Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Virupaksha »

So turkey is itching with aggressive intent to attack Syria and Syria is afraid that Turkey might do a Gulf of Tonkin (imaginary incident which US used to enter vietnam war, i.e. vietnam war's WMD) on it. Erdogan and his overzealous islamism and neo-ottamism are playing the role of Dick Cheney with its propaganda and false accusations.

I would not be surprised if even the recent so called attack by Syria was the result of numerous (ofcourse unreported) provacations of attacks, flights inside Syria. But when a mad dog is just waiting for an excuse to kill, it will find an excuse or WMD no matter what. My guess is Syria will go through a painful neo-ottamanism and colonisation by the islamist Erdogan.
Last edited by Virupaksha on 06 Oct 2012 02:36, edited 1 time in total.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

Thats stating the obvious, how can I provide you with evidence of actual cash payments etc? But ask yourself where does Asad have the cash to fund his war now?
You left out guns and personnel. I'm asking you for an article which shows that they've found something. Do you have an article that points to state sponsored initiative to fund Assad?
The overflight theory of transfer of weapons is actually very old - just ask the israelis. Its one of the major ways they transfer weapons.
Nice duck and cover. Let me go ahead and call the Israelis. :roll:
Of course nothing is black and white - thats why Maliki doesn't want to show the world and neither does Iran want to admit it is doing anything immoral in Syria (until very recently where they admitted they have "advisors") and same goes for Hezbollah - who were blurting all sorts of crap almost as if nothing going on there.

Just wait and see - happy to be proven wrong. I trust the info I get and its been pretty accurate so far.
Would you call Western backing of Sunni extremists immoral? Please don't bring morality into this. You say nothing is black and white but you don't see things that way. You're interpretation of what I said is expected. You're whole basis for Maliki-Assad super duper nexus rests on overflights...they don't find anything but wait, the Israelis say so...therefore it must be true. What a cop out. If you're going to defend your case at least do a bit more research. Yes we all know your track record with information supplied by "sources".
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG wrote: You left out guns and personnel. I'm asking you for an article which shows that they've found something. Do you have an article that points to state sponsored initiative to fund Assad?
Wait and see. Sure something will turn up at some point or maybe after the crisis is over.
Nice duck and cover. Let me go ahead and call the Israelis. :roll:
No google it - no need to call them.
Would you call Western backing of Sunni extremists immoral? Please don't bring morality into this. You say nothing is black and white but you don't see things that way. You're interpretation of what I said is expected. You're whole basis for Maliki-Assad super duper nexus rests on overflights...they don't find anything but wait, the Israelis say so...therefore it must be true. What a cop out. If you're going to defend your case at least do a bit more research. Yes we all know your track record with information supplied by "sources".
Lol - I said cash, weapons and men - and now you are saying the "whole basis is overflights" - no thats just one of the ways they are getting weapons in that has been revealed in public. They dont find anything because Iraq and Iran are working in sync! Its as simple as someone in Iran telling the IRaqi's dont search flight x - but look at flight y. Even during the AL conference in Baghdad the NYT article said the Iranians stopped.

But the very basis that US have leaked it to the press is to bring some element of pressure on the Iraqis to stop it. The US is not going to scramble aircraft to force an iranian plane with weapons to land - so chances are you won't see it to prevent any incident.

In this case its black and white - Maliki is fully behind and once I find out more I'll let you know specifics.

Do you think national security matters and these sorts of things are discussed via articles? They are only released when it is appropriate. What you hear in articles is only 5% of the story.

----------------------
Western intel is doing the logistics of weapons that is being bought principally from the Bulgarian military export agency. Basically the french are saying that some of the guys in the crisis cell who got killed in Damascus were thinking about switching sides.

The french are gathering intel and recruiting informants in syrian refugee camps in Jordan & Turkiy as well as providing the logistics for weapons transport. They are doing the logistics to prevent salafists from getting the weapons. Turkey has stopped all heavy weapons transfers because they dont want the PKK picking them up and using it against the Turks after (as I said before).

French Foreign min is going around boasting about how the DGSE got Tlass and General Muhammad Hussein Haj Ali to defect. Haj Ali is Qatar's choice to lead the Free Syrian National army. But Tlass is travelling around trying to garner support but Qatar doesnt back him - its the french that are backing Tlass's moves. Tlass has managed to get the FSA South commander Yasser Aboud to pledge allegiance. Riad Al Assad isn't backing Tlass because he sees him as just a playboy and not much military experience.

Doha still reckons a few top guys in Asad's coterie to defect. Doha has tasked its embassy in Beirut and Amman to pick up more details about Gen Haj Ali and his career history/ideological background.

Officially only KSA and Qatar are providing the weapons - the west is staying out for now because of concerns over the salafists and jihadis. Qatar has been providing from its own weapons stocks. Austrian Steyr rifles, UAE has been providing grenades etc.

To reduce dependence on Turkey - the FSA conducted operations on radar sites near the Jordan border to take out Syrian Air Force eyes. This has allowed more munitions to enter from the South and vehicles to pass.

CIA & MI6 provide the SIGINT and Satellite imagery. But the west arent training the FSA officers to use it - mainly only how to operate encrypted radios. The GCC intel and military wallas I presume are doing this bit and helping make use of the satellite imagery.


----------------------------
Hamas will open its new "embassy" in Cairo soon probably with Ismail Haniyeh - who is expected to lead. The new deal with the egyptians to target the salafists is angering the Iranians more - now Egyptians said we'll open up Rafah crossing but you have to also close the tunnels - this will anger the iranians even more as they use it to smuggle weapons etc in.

Hamas is trying its best to win Cairo's heart. All the key guys are in Cairo while Khaled Meshaal is in Ankara. Balance of Power is shifting to Gaza and Ismail Haniyeh - he is seen as more of a moderate compared to Meshaal. Musa Abu Marzook the guy who handles their dollars relocated to Cairo too.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5030
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Surya »

sources are so partial - did they predict the rally in Jordan
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

Wait and see. Sure something will turn up at some point or maybe after the crisis is over.
I'm not saying you're wrong. Just call it a theory. Is that so hard?
No google it - no need to call them.
You missed it...I have a source in Mossad you see.
Lol - I said cash, weapons and men - and now you are saying the "whole basis is overflights" - no thats just one of the ways they are getting weapons in that has been revealed in public. They dont find anything because Iraq and Iran are working in sync! Its as simple as someone in Iran telling the IRaqi's dont search flight x - but look at flight y. Even during the AL conference in Baghdad the NYT article said the Iranians stopped.

But the very basis that US have leaked it to the press is to bring some element of pressure on the Iraqis to stop it. The US is not going to scramble aircraft to force an iranian plane with weapons to land - so chances are you won't see it to prevent any incident.

In this case its black and white - Maliki is fully behind and once I find out more I'll let you know specifics.

Do you think national security matters and these sorts of things are discussed via articles? They are only released when it is appropriate. What you hear in articles is only 5% of the story.
You said cash, money, and men. When I asked for evidence you gave me overflights. When I asked for evidence on overflights you gave me Israelis. Maliki could be solidly be behind Assad however all the evidence that I've seen so far doesn't support this theory. Heh, I know that 5% of the story is released to the public. Therefore, I don't expect you to know more than 5% of the story. After all, if your "source" can supply you with information, it can't be sensitive in nature right? Oh and again, would you consider Western backing of Sunni extremists immoral?
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG even if an article comes out - would that automatically make it evidence?

No when you asked for evidence I told you about the US raising the issue and publicly trying to embarrass the Iraqis to pressure them to stop it. Even the article you posted said the US is not going to cut off aid and ruin their relationship with iraq over this issue. I said ask the Israelis because they have also been complaining about it for a long time too. Quit trying to twist what I am saying.

Believe what you want - we'll find out soon enough. Last post on this.

----------------------------
Article on Qassem Suleimani - rumour has it he may be the next president.
Iran’s Master of Iraq Chaos Still Vexes U.S.
By MICHAEL R. GORDON

WASHINGTON — When a senior Iraqi intelligence official traveled to Tehran in the summer of 2007 to meet with the Iranian leadership, he quickly figured out who was in charge of Iran’s policy toward its neighbor to the west.

It was not the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was Qassim Suleimani, the shadowy commander of Iran’s paramilitary Quds Force, who calmly explained that he was the “sole authority for Iranian actions in Iraq,” according to an account the Iraqi official later provided to American officials in Baghdad.

A soft-spoken, gray-haired operative who carries himself with the confidence that comes from having the backing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, General Suleimani is the antithesis of the bombastic Iranian president. Now a major general — the highest rank in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps — after a promotion last year, he has been the mastermind behind two central Iranian foreign policy initiatives, exerting and expanding Tehran’s influence in the internal politics of Iraq and providing military support for the rule of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

That role has put him in direct conflict with American policy makers hoping to ensure Iraq’s future as an ally of the United States, to bring about the fall of Mr. Assad and to curb Iran’s attempt to gain influence in the region. Last year, the United States Treasury Department put General Suleimani on its sanctions list because American officials said he had been involved in a plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

For the American officials who had to contend with the shadow war waged by Iran during the nearly nine years United States forces were in Iraq, that role is hardly a surprise. Their communications with General Suleimani and their own internal discussions, detailed in classified documents obtained for a new book on Iraq, provide a vivid picture of a persistent and effective executor of Iran’s international objectives.

Gen. David H. Petraeus, who came to know the Quds Force commander’s influence when he served in Iraq, once described General Suleimani as “a truly evil figure” in a letter to Robert M. Gates, then the defense secretary. In another letter, he acknowledged the influence General Suleimani had brought to bear in Iraq. “The most sobering surprise of the week was probably the extent of direct Iranian involvement in Iraqi political intrigue,” General Petraeus wrote in an April 2008 letter to Mr. Gates.

To a greater degree than other American officials in Iraq, General Petraeus, through intermediaries, had his own back-channel interactions with General Suleimani. He became convinced that being able to send a message to him was useful, but that meeting with the Iranian general, even secretly, would have elevated the Iranian’s stature and reinforced his notion that he was entitled to a say over Iraq’s future.

General Suleimani first came to the attention of Iraqis during Iran’s bloody eight-year war with Iraq. As commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ 41st Division, he gained a reputation for leading reconnaissance missions behind Iraqi lines — so much so that the Iraqi military would single him out in its radio broadcasts, according to Ali Alfoneh, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who has made a career out of studying General Suleimani.

The war shaped his attitude toward Iraq, according to Ryan C. Crocker, the former American ambassador to Baghdad. “For Qassim Suleimani, the Iran-Iraq war never really ended,” Mr. Crocker said in an interview. “No human being could have come through such a World War I-style conflict and not have been forever affected. His strategic goal was an outright victory over Iraq, and if that was not possible, to create and influence a weak Iraq.”

In the late 1990s, General Suleimani was picked to lead the Quds Force, a Revolutionary Guards special operations unit. The Revolutionary Guards was formed to support revolutionary movements abroad, including in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon.

After the 2003 American invasion of Iraq, General Suleimani took on the mission of expanding Iran’s influence in the country, tying down the American military and, ultimately, encouraging its exit: paramount objectives for an Iranian government that was determined to be a major power in the region and that felt threatened by expanding American military presence on its western and eastern flanks.

“This was the Quds Force’s assessment: ‘We have a golden opportunity. Now we can keep the Americans busy in this country, and as much as we can we should make chaos in this country,’ ” said Mohsen Sazegara, a founding member of the Revolutionary Guards who now lives in exile in the United States.

When the Green Zone in Baghdad was being pummeled by rockets in 2008, Adel Abdul Mahdi, Iraq’s vice president, asked General Suleimani in a meeting in Tehran whether he was behind the militia attacks. General Suleimani joked that if the fire “was accurate, it was his,” Mr. Abdul Mahdi later told Mr. Crocker, according to an American Embassy cable.

Even as the Quds Force under General Suleimani armed and trained Shiite militias in Iraq, he hosted some of Iraq’s most senior politicians. By stoking violence and then mediating the conflict, former American officials say, he could make himself indispensable and keep the Iraqis off balance.

“Further internecine Shia bloodshed is all but inevitable,” Mr. Crocker wrote in a June 2008 cable after General Suleimani played a role in brokering a cease-fire that enabled the battered Shiite militias in the Sadr City neighborhood of Baghdad, which Iran was supporting, to withdraw. “When such violence occurs, it seems likely that the parties will again trudge to Tehran and ask Qassim Suleimani to sort out the chaos that he has been instrumental in creating and perpetuating.”

One of the first messages American officials received from General Suleimani was in January 2007. American commandos had apprehended five midlevel Quds Force officers in Erbil, a city in the Iraqi Kurdistan region. The next week, General Suleimani met with Jalal Talabani, Iraq’s president, in Syria and gave him a message for Zalmay Khalilzad, then the American ambassador in Baghdad: Iran was prepared to open a dialogue with the United States provided that General Suleimani was the conduit.

The Quds Force chief, Mr. Talabani reported, acknowledged that he had hundreds of agents in Iraq, some of whom had conspired to attack British troops, but he insisted that they had not been involved in encouraging attacks against Americans, a claim American officials thought was blatantly false.

President George W. Bush approved meeting with the Iranian representatives on Iraq, but not with General Suleimani. When the United States held three-way talks with Iranian and Iraqi diplomats in the summer of 2007 in Baghdad, Mr. Crocker and General Petraeus reported that the Iranian representatives had no real authority.

Soon after the meetings, General Suleimani reached out to the American commander with a proposal. In a meeting in a Tehran hotel with Shirwan al-Waeli, the head of one of Iraq’s competing intelligence services, General Suleimani instructed the Iraqi official to tell General Petraeus that attacks by Shiite militias in Iraq would be reduced if the Americans released Qais al-Khazali, whom British commandos had captured in March. “You will see results in two months,” General Suleimani said, according to Mr. Waeli.

For General Petraeus, the offer was out of the question. Mr. Khazali, the leader of a Shiite militia, had been linked to a raid that led to the deaths of five American soldiers in Karbala, and General Petraeus demanded that the Quds Force stop training and arming Shiite militants in Iraq.

“To provide a bit more jolt, I said that I am considering telling the president that I believe Iran is, in fact, waging war on the United States in Iraq,” General Petraeus wrote to Mr. Gates, recounting the response he had told Mr. Waeli to convey to General Suleimani. “For what it’s worth, I do believe that Iran has gone beyond merely striving for influence in Iraq and could be creating proxies to actively fight us, thinking that they can keep us distracted while they try to build WMD and set up JAM to act like Lebanese Hezbollah in Iraq,” he added, using the American military acronyms for weapons of mass destruction and for the largest of the Shiite militias, the Mahdi Army.

But the shadow war continued.

After Iran began supplying its militia partners with deadly rocket-assisted mortars — what the American military called IRAMs — General Petraeus sent a message of his own. Maj. Gen. Michael D. Barbero, General Petraeus’s operations officer, met with Hadi al-Amari, a Shiite politician and the former head of the Badr Organization, a Shiite militia founded to fight President Saddam Hussein of Iraq with the backing of the Quds Force.

If Mr. Amari’s “friends to the east” did not stop their attacks, General Barbero said, the Americans would drastically escalate their raids against the Quds Force’s suspected proxies and agents in Iraq — raids that would involve Task Force 17, a secret commando unit dedicated to countering Iranian influence. The attacks stopped for more than a year, a former military official said, but they later resumed and would remain a problem until American forces left Iraq in 2011.

In an April 2008 letter to Mr. Gates, General Petraeus noted that he had rebuffed a proposal by General Suleimani, which had been relayed through Mr. Talabani and Mr. Abdul Mahdi, that the Americans meet with him for secret talks.

“Don’t worry; won’t support those,” General Petraeus wrote.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by Pratyush »

Shyamd Ji,

What are your sources saying about Jordan and the future of royalty.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

Havent asked but he'll survive imo as a constitutional monarchy. And if push comes to shove he won't fight like Bashar - he'll do a shah and will exile himself in the west.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

RoyG even if an article comes out - would that automatically make it evidence?

No when you asked for evidence I told you about the US raising the issue and publicly trying to embarrass the Iraqis to pressure them to stop it. Even the article you posted said the US is not going to cut off aid and ruin their relationship with iraq over this issue. I said ask the Israelis because they have also been complaining about it for a long time too. Quit trying to twist what I am saying.

Believe what you want - we'll find out soon enough. Last post on this.
You use articles to back your points, don't you? I just wanted to know if there was something that could corroborate your theory that weapons, cash, and personnel were found. That's all. Again, I never said you were wrong. I'm just wondering why you think allowing overflights over its aerospace automatically means that it is fully behind Assad? They are walking a tightrope between Syria, Iran and the US. They will give and take here and there with each one. I don't believe Maliki is fully backing anyone. Moreover, you ignore the fact that Iraq has a huge Sunni demographic. I'm not twisting your words at all.

Again, you forgot to address my last question: Do you think that Western backing of Sunni extremists in Syria is immoral? Just a yes or no would be sufficient.
nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by nakul »

Again, you forgot to address my last question: Do you think that Western backing of Sunni extremists in Syria is immoral? Just a yes or no would be sufficient.
This question is not pointed at me but I want to say that immoral things are beneficial to us. We must see whether India benefits from us or not. The Afghan invasion was/is immoral but drove down the Kashmiri insurgency problem. Earlier Libya, now Syria keeps worldwide terror co away from our borders. There are many things that are immoral but karma is a she dog & slowly those who do immoral things like US abusing its power & crumbling, are helping us rise.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5619
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by RoyG »

^^You're right. However, he didn't mean it in that way when he pointed to "immorality" of Maliki's supposed actions in Syria.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7100
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: West Asia News and Discussions

Post by shyamd »

RoyG wrote: You use articles to back your points, don't you? I just wanted to know if there was something that could corroborate your theory that weapons, cash, and personnel were found. That's all. Again, I never said you were wrong. I'm just wondering why you think allowing overflights over its aerospace automatically means that it is fully behind Assad? They are walking a tightrope between Syria, Iran and the US. They will give and take here and there with each one. I don't believe Maliki is fully backing anyone. Moreover, you ignore the fact that Iraq has a huge Sunni demographic. I'm not twisting your words at all.
Which is why I said they will just make public show of "checking" flights to get the US off his back and reduce pressure but under the surface he is also providing cash for Asad troops to continue their fight. The balance with Maliki is just for show. He is doing this at the risk of a regional war (by proxy). Ask me in 2 weeks and I'll tell you more with specifics hopefully.
Again, you forgot to address my last question: Do you think that Western backing of Sunni extremists in Syria is immoral? Just a yes or no would be sufficient.
My point was that Iraq will find some justification to back Damascus fully not about morality - I've said before there is no such thing as morality in international politics. Iran/Iraq doesnt want its people to know the level of support they are providing to Syria and what little they do admit is being hidden under the cover of morality. To the public and the world they will find some moral excuse . In the Gulf they are saying its about helping the syrian people - reality its about strategic defeat of Iranian interests. For the West - again about helping syrian people - but reality is defeat of iranian and russian interests. For the iranian alliance its about "defending the integrity of syria" - reality is protecting their alliance and their interests.
Post Reply