Foreign Policy Diary – Escalation in Syria leads to a global war

Donate

Loading the player...

Help produce more actual and interesting content, join our struggle by donating via PayPal: southfront@list.ru or via: http://southfront.org/donate/

The recent developments show significant changes in the strategy of the Western countries involved in the Syrian conflict. The US has sent ground forces, including special operations units, into the region. French Air Force has sharply increased the number of sorties, and France’s rapid-reaction troops and naval units are being moved closer to Syria. The United Kingdom has also begun to participate in the US-led anti-ISIS coalition strikes on Syrian soil. Likewise Germany has begun to deploy its aircraft and relocating almost 1200 quick-reaction troops to the Syria-Iraq battlefield. Turkey is deploying a large military attack force, including a number of armored units, at the border with Syria. It seems that NATO powers have realized the strategy aimed at Assad’s ouster by a diverse range of militant groups including ISIS which is backed by Turkey and the US has failed.

According to the initial scenario implemented by the West, ISIS and other militant groups, deceitfully called the moderate opposition, were to carry out a Libya-like scenario in Syria and oust or preferably kill Assad and plunge the whole country into chaos. Then the US-led coalition would start a full-scale military operation to stop the terrorists threatening the “moderate opposition” in Syria, deploy NATO forces on the ground and take control of the crucial oil and logistic infrastructure. Western oil corporations supported by NATO would then restore the state of affairs as it existed more than 40 years ago. Syria would fall victim to total exploitation by overseas powers. The Mediterranean would become Alliance’ internal lake.

Now it’s clear that Syria won’t fall under terrorist group pressure. The Syrian forces backed by Russia and Iran are gaining momentum, recapturing cities and facilities earlier controlled by militants. The NATO allies urgently need a new plan to hold control at least of the northern oil corridor from Iraq and try to take advantage of this opportunity to involve Russia in a long expensive war, in other words, to accomplish that which they failed to do in Ukraine. It means that the NATO contingent must occupy crucial infrastructure including oilfields before the Syrian government forces liberate it. Anti-government, meaning anti-Russian and anti-Iranian, forces would be established in parts of divided Syria. The need for an excuse to implement the changed approach could be the reason why the Nov.13 Paris attack wasn’t prevented by the Western special services.

The implication of the Western plan to divide Syria in a number of vassal entities leads to 3 main scenarios:

1)   Military buildup and escalation in the region could lead to open military conflict between NATO and the alternative anti-ISIS coalition that is led by Russia. This regional conflict could easily lead to a global war. Moreover, Turkey, a NATO member state, has already shown that it’s ready to escalate the situation to defend its illegal oil business linked with ISIS.

2)    If the Syrian Arab Army with support by militia forces, Iran, and Russia isn’t able to show a significant success on the battlefield, Syria could be easily divided by the Western-backed ground forces supported by NATO airpower and intelligence assets. A direct military intervention to take control of the oil structure and crucial logistical points also remains possible. Even if NATO and its regional allies successfully take control of a significant part of the country, this escalation is unlikely to be avoided. The situation will become more acute due to the establishment of an aggressive puppet regime on the Syria’s territory. Considering that the alternative anti-ISIS coalition won’t lay down its arms, an open conflict could be easily provoked by the interested powers.

3)   If the Syrian government forces supported by Russia and Iran take control of the country’s key areas, the US-led coalition will face the fact that Syria is de-facto liberated from terrorist groups. It could prevent a direct military intervention by NATO. In this case, the NATO countries would strengthen their presence in Iraq and use it as a foothold to launch further destructive actions against Syria. However, it’s the safest scenario most likely to avoid a global escalation.

Donate

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Any Mouse

    Wasn’t it Putins great idea to invite Paris and thus NATO into Syria?

    • Kalin

      I don’t believe Putin invited anyone anywhere. If he has I’d like you to quote the source. I don’t believe Putin has horned in on other’s authority. This is why Russia won’t shoot down NATO jets in Syria unless they fire on Russian military. He is a very cool man with remarkable self-discipline.

      Folks need to distinguish what is Syria’s authority and what is Russia’s. So far as I have seen, Russia is doing their job in Syria without usurping Syria’s authority over their own land and skies – even though the encroachment of Jewish influenced forces around them may be against Putin’s better judgement.

      The fact is, Assad and Putin are in a very touchy predicament. They’re doing what must be done, while trying to spare their people and the people of the world from the works of the most evil, mass-murderers on the planet – the Jewish dominated, western nations on each sides of the Atlantic ocean.

  • Roasted Piglet

    Maybe Iraq will change its policy and invite regular Iranian Army forces in to clear out Daesh and other western proxy forces?

    Putin should also reconsider Syrian policy, and put a few divisions on the ground to secure the borders to keep NATO out.

  • Philipp Roth

    I dont think Paris was a false Flag….

  • Antonio A Alves

    The Russia urgently needs to make a nuclear attack on a capital of Europe thus the nations will fear and will let US influence throughout Europe this only ends if Russia makes this the truth is hard

    • SeanQ39

      Yes assuring retaliatory nuclear strikes on Moscow, You fool. haha your ignorance pains me.

  • jim

    Have you got a source for this: “The US has sent ground forces, including special operations units, into the region.”? It is the first I have heard of it.

    • Gambeir Bay

      What I would say, off hand, is that if there are physical US special forces doing something, then it’s probably because they don’t want you to see what the contractors are doing.

      • SeanQ39

        Says the sheep.

  • Kalin

    Ahhhh . . . the smell of money for bankers and military contractors.

    Let’s keep in mind that 70% of retired US Generals take jobs with military contractors, and of course promoting war is their primary duty.

  • what you see is a fraud

    Assad shouldmake a public statement saying that not invited armies would be attacked by the Syrian armed forces and non invited planes would be shot down .He should also ask where is the Un security council permission to wage war on Syria ? I do not understand why there are the S-300 and S- 400 and are not used .

    • SeanQ39

      As if anyone is worried about Assads impotent army. haha thats rich.

  • Gambeir Bay

    It’s what wars are about, stealing, canceling debts with death, selling the machines to accomplish it, selling the propaganda to the sheep so they will actually go get killed to make it all work.

    Yea, it is about money, in this case also Oil and Drugs out of the poppy fields.

    • SeanQ39

      And the otherside sells its propaganda to the other sheep (you) to speak ill of the US and everyone else who can conquer the weak oil money dependent muslim world.