23 December 2018

Why Did Trump Pull Out Of Syria: Another Khashoggi Gift

Something funny happened last Thursday.

To the shock and dismay of Republicans in Congress, the military-industrial complex and America's NATO allies, Donald Trump declared that he was withdrawing all the American troops in Syria.

He did it despite strong opposition from his own cabinet, his staunch supporters in the Senate and America's various allies around the globe.

He didn't even flinch when his Secretary of Defense James "Mad Dog" Mattis abruptly resigned over the issue.

US Defence Chief James Mattis Quits Over Trump's Syria, Afghanistan Move

Subsequently, when Syria envoy Brett McGurk resigned, he called it a "non-event."

America's withdrawal from Syria means several things.

One, Bashar al-Assad will remain in power completing the dreaded "Shia Crescent."

Two, without the US, Russia and Iran will be the main players in Syria and will largely determine the future of the country and the entire Middle East.

Three, Turkey will be free to enter Northern Syria and bomb Syrian Kurds, a key US ally in fighting ISIS, killing tens of thousands.

Please tell me how these three points make any sense from an American perspective.

The Shia Crescent, which assumes that Iran, Iraq and Syria are trying to encircle the Sunni Arabs, was the main reason why the Gulf countries tried to destabilize Al-Assad's regime and Saudis launched their murderous campaign in Yemen.

Why would they accept this silently?

Moreover, leaving Iran and Russia as the main power players in the region could not be desirable for Israel or the Sunni countries.

Iran will now steadily increase its influence throughout the region.

Already, Russia, Iran and Turkey are working with the Special UN Envoy Staffan de Mistura to draft the new Syrian constitution.

Why was Iran's most implacable foe Bibi Netanyahu's reaction a muted "we will study it"?

Other than Russia and Iran the country that clearly benefits from this withdrawal is Turkey. There are now reports that Trump made that decision on the spot while talking to Turkey's President on Thursday stunning his advisors.
“Why are you still there?” Erdoğan demanded, according to the account.

With the Turkish leader still on the line, Trump asked the same question of his national security adviser, John Bolton, who repeated US policy until then, that the defeat of Isis had to be “enduring”, preventing the possibility of a resurgence.

To the surprise of Bolton and Erdoğan, Trump instantly sided with the Turkish president.
I don't believe for a minute that Trump is the kind of guy who would not react belligerently to a question like "why are you still there?" let alone side with such an interlocutor.

He made it clear that the pull out was to leave Turkey in charge.



Before the Trump's withdrawal decision Erdogan had already declared his intention to attack Syrian Kurds in the coming weeks. He gave a major speech announcing the start a large scale operation in Syria. Two days later he threaten to invade Manbij if the US refuses to remove YPG fighters from the area.

Typically such a bellicose approach does not work well with Pentagon or the White House especially since Turkey is not in a position to start hostilities anywhere if the US is opposed to them.

When I heard the withdrawal decision, I immediately concluded that it had something to do with the Khashoggi murder and Trump's desire to protect Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS).

The muted Israeli reaction and the deafening silence from the Gulf countries supported my guess.

Then I saw this on Al Jazeera, the Qatar-based news network:
"They [people in Congress] are also suggesting that Trump is doing this as a favour to Turkey - the reason he wants Turkey onside, perhaps, is to ease the pressure on Saudi Arabia, particularly over the death of Jamal Khashoggi," said Fisher, referring to the October 2 murder of the Saudi journalist inside the kingdom's consulate in the Turkish city of Istanbul.
In other words, Trump threw the Syrian Kurds under the bus to protect MBS, which means Turkey, as I have been claiming, has damning evidence implicating the Crown Prince and is threatening to use it at every turn.

Unfortunately for both MBS and Trump, this will not go far. The pull out is scheduled to complete in 100 days.

During that time, Syrian Kurds will reach out to Bashar Al-Assad and offer their help and support in his campaign to reclaim his rule and the Russians will support that move.

At that point neither Turkey nor the US will be able to do much the change the power balance on the ground.

Once again Putin will be the kingmaker. Because of that there is even a chance that the withdrawal might never take place.

The timeline also coincides with the conclusion of the Mueller investigation, whose findings are expected to be made public sometime in February.

With Trump in a fight for his life, MBS will lose his principal backer. At which point a palace coup might take place and a new Crown Prince might emerge.

We'll see in due course.

But one thing is clear, the Khashoggi murder will continue to have profound consequences.

----------------

UPDATE:

In case you were wondering:
But shortly after announcing Mr Shanahan's appointment on Sunday, Mr Trump moved to calm widespread concerns over the pullout which he initially said would be "rapid". 
Mr Trump said on Twitter that he had spoken with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about "our mutual involvement in Syria, & the slow and highly coordinated withdrawal of US troops from the area".
He was blackmailed. And now he is trying to reassure the American "deep state."

Good luck with trying to square that circle.

--------------
UPDATE 2

In case you were wondering about the corner Trump found himself in:
Turkey is massing troops near a town in northern Syria held by a Kurdish-led force backed by the US, a war monitor and Turkish media have said.
The buildup comes despite Ankara saying it would delay a promised offensive in eastern Syria in the wake of Donald Trump’s surprise announcement on Wednesday to withdraw US troops from the country, which it welcomed.
I really wish MBS was worth it.

But he is not.

----------------
UPDATE 3

Here is what former NATO commander retired General Wesley Clark said about the withdrawal:
During a CNN appearance on December 24, Clark stressed that “there doesn’t seem to be any strategic rational for the decision. And if there is no strategic rational, then you have to ask, ‘Why was the decision made? I can tell you that people around the world are asking this. And some of our friends and our allies in the Middle East are asking, ‘Well, did Erdogan blackmail the president? Was there a payoff or something? Why would a guy make a decision like this?’” [my emphasis]
You read it here first.

12 comments:

  1. US assassinates Solomon-I, in Iraq, in a Quasi-Shia State, in the wee hours of the morning - Part 1

    Y would a Iranian Gen – who is anti-Israel and America, fly from a Commercial/Military Airport in Iraq – when the US embassy was firebombed just a few days ago ? He would have known that all his e-signatures would be tracked by the Americans,second by second,and there would be no dearth of spies at the hangar,ATC,Airport who would ply the Americans with precise coordinates of the General’s flight patterns ?

    Surely after the US embassy bombing the Good General would have been told by his team to exit Iraq ? Could a general be so careless or foolish – that he would think that he could exit from a designated airport,after the US embassy escapade – and with another designated terrorist (designed by USA) – with makes it a double prime target – and with no collateral baggage ? In ISIS days – he was fighting with the Americans – and those days are over.

    Persian Shia’ism is not a suicide cult – it appears to be one – but it is not.So the general was misled into complacency and entrapped by some , in the Iraqi state, to take that flight – and the US embassy firebombing might also have been a false flag operation as the US troops shot no one – id.est., no firebomber was killed.But the sons of Xerxes and Cyrus cannot be so naive and foolish.The General would not have boarded that plane unless he was secured by the Russians and Tehran.2000 years ago, the Jews inserted a fake verse into the Old Testament and Talmud – to state that Cyrus was the messiah- and showed it to Cyrus – who like a fool, believed it, and rebuilt the Temple !The General had read the Torah,Talmud,Hebrew Bible and the History of the Jews and the Nassara

    CNN portrays the killing as a “Trump rash reaction” – but it is not.Ultimately,the USA will go to war with Iran – as the Americans do not trust the Persian Shias – on the N-Bomb,and the Persians do not trust the Jews or the Nassara. Soleimani was just the catalyst to push the Persians into the N- Suspension, and go full N-throttle – which is what the Persians have done – and which is what the Americans wanted.

    Iraqi govtt will kick out the US troops and the US troops will not leave – as that is what the Americans (and Kurds,Nassara,Sunnis) really want.To be precise, the Kurds,Suniis do not want the Yankii to leave – but that they be asked to leave – so that their mortal fears of living under Persian Shias is brought to the fore – for a partition of the Iraqi state

    What the Americans want is to trifurcate Iraq – which will happen inevitably post Soleimani – and which is what the Persians also seek,although the Persians would like to Shia-ise the whole of Iraq.Persian security interests are preserved by destabilising and burning Iraq to create a “sea of fire” between them and the US/Israel and satellite Hezbollahs all over the Gulf,especially encircling the Saudis (The Soleimani Doctrine).But now,they will be happy with a trifurcation

    After trifurcating Itaq the Persians will export their franchise and the brand to all Shia regions in GCC and Africa (where the USA has lesser troops and even lesser interest).Even the EU/PRC will be pleased – and this will look like an amicable solution (already crafted) – after creating a well planned disaster (assassinating Soleimani)dindooohindoo

    ReplyDelete
  2. Soleimani - Part 2

    There was no inpending attack by Soleimani – just lies and deception of the American state.There are many heads of Terror Groups in the Gulf who can be killed, with or w/o collateral impact – but they are never taken out – not even by Israel or ISIS (Israel Secret Intel Service).The Americans chose a Persian Shia,when the whole Sunni world hates Persia and the Persia Shian, and killed him in a Quasi Shia State – and so there is no empathy or support for the Persians – even after the assassination – not even from Russia and PRC.

    Obviously,the Russians,PRC,EU would have known – and they did not tip off the Persians and the Americans shot off 4 Hell Fire’s – and THERE WAS NO COLLATERAL PRESENCE AT THE AIRPORT AT THAT TIME. A marked man would travel in the presence of ample collateral baggage – like the Hamas and Hezb, do in Gaza – to provoke Collateral damage,and then the Christian empathy,by Amanpour on CNN

    The Persians have launched a muffled attack at a site which it knows, hosts no Americans, using missiles which have the capacity to hit US barracks,and knowing that the site hosts Iraqis – where the Iranians had ample intel and time to affix missile coordinates for the terminal descent – and they did not.The Persians used BM with intent, SO THAT THE AMERICANS could track their launch and loading and set up – AND THE AMERICANS did NOT TAKE OUT THE LAUNCHERS AND SILOS – before take off.

    Not only that,the American ADS did not intercept the missiles - via BMD or Interceptor aircrafts. They say that they believed that the Persians would NOT hit the US Army barracks ! Is this love or a dream ? Or a Happy ending - Bangkok style ? Not 1 Iraqi killed ! The BM flew over LONG Distances - to give enough time for the Yankii to
    triangulate the possible targets - and still the Yankii did not shoot it down !What is GOING ON HERE ! We have a Hollywood movie here !

    The whole story stinks and if it ends with the Persian missile strike – it will stink even more.Odds are there will be more strikes by the Persians and US will make 1 strike (at least) on Persian soil – to further aggravate the Persians into the N-Bomb – and then disaster will come when either side hits civilians by plan or strategy

    What is the Shia thinking here ? What is to stop the USA to take out more Iranian Generals and leaders outside of Iran and then as the US polls get close,the Mossad and CIA will have the same car/bike bonbs INSIDE IRAN to kill Iranian N-Scientists and leaders and then provoke a Tehrir square ?

    A few days ago,the Iranian media mentioned the US blowing up of a Iranian Airliner long ago.Coincidentally,a NATO nation – Article 5 nation – had its commercial aircraft blown up in Tehran- with no survivors – at take off time – with all tanks full,Ukraine is a nation that Trump and the USA have sworn to protect.

    Just providence of coincidence and incidence.No one is reporting on the passenger list – surely there would no Shias on the plane.Now it seems that the Persians shot down the plane via ADS at Tehran.They say that they thought it was a Cruise missile (low altitude missile!).More lies .The Cruise missile would cross the land border of Iran and so would be detected 4-500 kilometers away - flying at Mach 4 to 8.A plane at take off stage would be at sub Mach 1 ( a sitting duck).dindooohindoo

    ReplyDelete