And next, Syria?

[CrabbedOne]

On Al Monitor Following gas attack, Israel reassesses Syrian threat

...
Both the IDF's Intelligence Division and the Mossad concluded that the agreement had been fulfilled in its entirety, and that Assad did, in fact, forgo this strategic asset. According to intelligence sources, Assad was concerned that an American cruise missile and aerial assault would lead to the final collapse of his regime. In other words, he did have "his back against the wall," and decided to give up his chemical weapons arsenal to survive. Israel believed that the Syrian regime kept only "residual" chemical capabilities, i.e., something symbolic, or an "emergency supply" of chemical weapons, to be used only if Assad is forced to flee for his life. The same Israeli assessment also claimed that some 98% of Assad's arsenal of sarin or VX nerve gas (about 1,300 tons) no longer existed.

If it was, in fact, Assad, who used nerve gas in Idlib on April 4 (no one else is capable of launching such an attack), these assessments by Israeli and other sources have been invalidated.

This has long-term implications. After reaching an agreement that Syria would rid itself of its chemical weapons stockpiles, it seemed obvious to Jerusalem that Israel was out of danger when it came to the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) against its population. This assessment of the situation led Israel to abandon existing procedures to defend civilians from chemical weapons. Until then, every Israeli citizen received a chemical weapons defense kit from the government, which included a gas mask and other equipment. It was a convoluted and expensive setup, which was difficult to maintain (every newborn needs new equipment, mask filters must be replaced, etc.), but it remained in force as long as Israel felt threatened. And so, ever since 2013, this defense procedure was abandoned, and the manufacture of gas masks in Israel came to a halt. The April 4 incident in Idlib raises questions about that decision.
...

Sent a scare through the Israelis but seems to be calming down. The assumption is this is a residual capacity. That may be wishful thinking. Israeli intelligence has a great PR operation but is in fact often a bit crap. The Iranians have been quite effective at feeding them misinformation.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On Atlantic Council Trump Has Few Options to Respond to Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria

...
Q: Why is Idlib important to the Assad regime? Will it become the next Aleppo?

Itani: Idlib is the last large area in western Syria that’s fully controlled by the armed opposition. From Idlib, the opposition has been launching ground offensives into key regime areas. Securing this western half of Syria is the regime’s priority. Idlib is the thorn in their side. It has to eventually be taken; it has to eventually be subdued.

It’s not like Aleppo in that it’s much more rural; it has no large cities, and it has a much more difficult geography. Taking it yard by yard would be very costly. It calls for a different strategy than the one used by the regime to take Aleppo.
...

And Assad does not have much manpower he can afford to lose.

Quite a pickle, perhaps Trump's first foreign policy crisis, Trump's hinted he might intervene militarily. The Russians may not like it but Assad will probably wait a while and poke him in the chest again as the big guy looks feart.

The IAF does when it hits supply to HA but they've an MV with Russia over this and that gets a little shaky if they reach deep into Syria. They'll be desperately trying to figure out if Assad's CW program is up and running again. It's hard to see Putin agreeing to the US degrading regime capabilities they deny exist. Trump's pretty much bullshitted himself into a corner over confronting Russia though he might go shouty at this point. And that leaves upping covert support to rebels that some on Team Trump basically regard as Radical Islamic Terrorists.

 

[CrabbedOne]

Anatomy of a terror weapon.

Stein's concluding it's held back CW stocks.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On ARANEWS US-led Coalition building large infrastructure north Syria to combat ISIS in Raqqa

...
The United States has expanded a runway in Kobane to accommodate the large C-17 military plane needed to help with logistics for the push to retake the ISIS stronghold of Raqqa, a U.S. defense official told the AFP.

The US has already seven bases in northern Syria from where it deploys its forces in support of the Kurdish-led SDF. The Syrian government has continued to oppose the US presence, fearing they could make the Kurds in Syria less dependent on Damascus.

SDF officials have suggested that these bases in Tabqa, Kobane, and Rumelan could be an alternative to the US base in Turkey’s Incirlik, and reduce US dependence on Turkey for anti-ISIS operations–supporting the SDF that Turkey opposes.
...

Talk of an "indefinite stabilization mission".

 

[mikey mikey]

I'm conflicted. If Trump bombs Syria, do we hate him or do we agree with him because Assad?
Will the Democrats an Neocons agree with Trunp that bombs are great, will they still let me condemn Trunp for it?
If Trump moves against Russia, can I still believe that Trump is still in the WH because of Putin, or do we really have to forget all that?
It seems a bit of waste of time, after all that convincing myself about hacking elections. }sigh{

 

[phillm]

I'm conflicted. If Trump bombs Syria, do we hate him or do we agree with him because Assad?
Will the Democrats an Neocons agree with Trunp that bombs are great, will they still let me condemn Trunp for it?
If Trump moves against Russia, can I still believe that Trump is still in the WH because of Putin, or do we really have to forget all that?
It seems a bit of waste of time, after all that convincing myself about hacking elections. }sigh{

Can we call in the CR / Pilger "Trump warranties" which went along the lines that however much a cunt he is he'll bomb the world less rather than more.

 

[CrabbedOne]

I'm conflicted. If Trump bombs Syria, do we hate him or do we agree with him because Assad?
Will the Democrats an Neocons agree with Trunp that bombs are great, will they still let me condemn Trunp for it?
If Trump moves against Russia, can I still believe that Trump is still in the WH because of Putin, or do we really have to forget all that?
It seems a bit of waste of time, after all that convincing myself about hacking elections. }sigh{

Yes to both, he's not Obama after all and Obama loved bombs.
Yes and yes he is Trump after all.
Yes the treacherous agent Trumpski doing Putin up like a kipper would be entirely in character.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On Buzzfeednews Trump May Have Changed His Syria Policy And The Pentagon Is Confused

...
Trump said on Wednesday, at a joint press conference with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, that images of children and other civilians killed by a suspected sarin gas attack a day earlier in the Syrian city of Idlib “crosses many lines, beyond a red line, many many lines.” He said he was appalled by the attack and called it “unacceptable,” while adding that his opinion of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had changed.

He appeared to open the door to US action in response to the chemical attack, as had his ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, earlier in the day while chairing an emergency session of the Security Council.

But three defense officials told BuzzFeed News they cannot begin to craft a military response, if that is what Trump wants, without a clear understanding of what the president wants to see happen in Syria. Does he only want the Assad regime to stop using chemical weapons? Does he want regime change? Is he seeking a negotiated settlement? Or were Trump’s comments simply rhetoric?

US officials have surmised that the Assad regime was behind the attack on Tuesday, which killed at least 70 people and injured hundreds more after US radar showed Syrian aircraft in the area of attack. In the aftermath, scores of photos showed bodies lying on the ground, with white foam coming out of noses and mouths as the victims suffocated to death. The regime has repeatedly been accused of using chemical weapons against its people, including chlorine gas.

The three defense officials told BuzzFeed News they believe Assad may have launched Tuesday’s attack to test the president, particularly after members of his administration had indicated Assad could stay in power. Most notably, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Thursday that: "I think the status and the longer-term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people."

At the time, many heard a new Syria policy, one that no longer called for Assad to leave power, as it had during the Obama administration.
...

My bold, Trump basically being a dyed orange bullshit machine on legs surely can't have escaped them?

 

[CrabbedOne]

Exum "How willing are you to kill some Russians?"

Trump's razor in play there. All things being equal assume The Donald will opt for "stupid shit".

 

[CrabbedOne]

 

[8den]

fucking hell.

 

[CrabbedOne]

May have crossed Bibi's redlines as well.

 

[CrabbedOne]

Thread. Worries strikes will feel good but create a very unstable situation.

 

[mikey mikey]

http://thebaffler.com/latest/new-praetorianism-blanchfield

Here’s the hard truth: There is a fundamental synergy between Democratic chauvinist exceptionalism, GOP clash-of-civilizations dogma, and Trump’s grotesque strongman antics. The Democrats may prefer a reboot of Cold War apocalypticism; Trump, for his part, looks eager to tear up global treaties, toss international law aside, and throw American weight around in building a new twenty-first century order of Great Powers. Maybe he will get his way, maybe he won’t. Maybe one of the parties will produce a more telegenic, more reasonable, and more “moderate” leader down the line. Any of these scenarios, though, skirts ever closer to disaster, and all take as unspoken that the essential business of the American state is a fundamental orientation toward war.

 

[CrabbedOne]

Be interesting to see how support for Trump's action was in Congress. Seems to have been entirely unilateral. As the influential Israelis where hopping mad I imagine it would be high.

Trump can't be said to have developed a political mandate to act in Syria either. Rather the reverse. On the other hand this is entirely in character of the obviously very volatile man the US voter handed the nuclear football. Only a fool would trust this man's word.

Main difference is Clinton would not have so plainly signalled toleration to Assad. Bashar being Bashar was always likely to probe the limits of that. He does that even with the Russians. She would have prepped domestic political support. This can now get ugly fast.

On Assad's side the Al Shayrat airbase appears to have been completely destroyed. That's an important base critical for the defence of Homs. Trump's now reversed his position and is saying Assad may have to go. Regime appears to be soiling itself. Family evacuations etc.

Think of it as a different kind of reset with Russia. They've got deep Air Defence systems all over Syria. CENTCOM has to fly through that to attack Raqqa etc. Putin may be reconsidering their position on deconfliction.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On War On The Rocks TRUMP’S ATTACK ON SYRIA: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY

...
The Ugly

Trump condemned Obama for considering a strike against Assad for the 2013 chemical weapons attack and demanded he go to Congress for approval. On the campaign trail, Trump often implied that he would work with Assad and Russia to fight terrorism. The real problem, he repeatedly insisted, was the Islamic State rather than Bashar Assad. We have heard repeatedly that Trump was a realist and was not interested in foreign intervention. Just days ago, senior members of the administration seemed to accept that Assad was here to stay. Yet, after this week’s chemical weapons attack, Trump was apoplectic and said there would be a response. And there was. While the chemical attack was undeniably horrific, Assad has been killing civilians with bullets and bombs for years in far greater numbers. To be direct, it scares me how quickly and casually Trump changed a longstanding policy preference on a major issue — especially one that involves death and destruction — and for reasons that are, to put it lightly, unclear. I worry what that portends for decisions on war and peace over the next four or eight years.

Yes, Trump is simply a loose cannon but to be fair to him it was really clear he had the impulse control of a toddler.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On ISW Russian and Iranian Basing in Syria: March 21, 2017

 

[CrabbedOne]

On Lawfare What Effect Will Trump's Airstrikes Really Have?

...
If a more sustained bombing campaign followed the cruise missile strikes, it might affect Asad’s calculations more profoundly, but even then air power alone has many limits if there is no force on the ground to magnify its impact. If the U.S. goal is deterrence, as Trump suggested in his remarks, this often requires sustained and repeated actions to bolster credibility—so the most recent strike should only be the beginning.

I also worry that the about-face against the Asad regime is not coordinated diplomatically. We are acting in haste, without making sure that our use of force is serving our political strategy rather than determining it. It is not clear what we are asking Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and other potential partners to do differently or how we are trying to get Asad’s backers, particularly Russia (Iran is a lost cause on this) to decrease their support for the regime. Indeed, directly or indirectly we may be risking a military conflict with Russia, and even if the Trump administration wants to confront Moscow over Syria, such an escalation demands careful thought, coordination, and planning. Most important, it is unclear what political settlement the United States wants in Syria and which actors Washington wants to empower—we know what we don’t want, but it is less clear what we do want.

So we can feel good that we punched back against a dictator who is brutalizing his own people, but the bombing will do little to advance American goals in Syria without more dramatic and lasting changes.

Well it may deter Assad from using Sarin in other than last ditch situations but it won't have any significant effect on the slaughter in Syria. CW has never been a significant factor in that.

The point in the snip above is a good one. Trump is winging it and it's unclear what political objective he has other than making Trump feel good. He may have saved some thousands Syrians from a pretty horrible death but his isn't a sound way to prosecute a war. Pentagon sources were complaining they needed direction on strategic objectives.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On ISW Russian Airstrikes in Syria: March 1 - April 3, 2017

Mentions the rebel Hama offensive.

 

[CrabbedOne]

...
The 2015 agreement details steps Russian and U.S.-led coalition pilots should take to avoid accidental encounters as they carry out strikes against separate targets.

It was also intended to head off the possibility of Russian air defenses shooting down U.S. aircraft, drones or missiles. Russia’s foreign ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, said Friday that Moscow “will never agree to attacks on the legitimate authorities” in Syria.

“We see these actions taken by the American side as a grave violation of the memorandum,” Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov told reporters on Friday.

Russia, he added, would help strengthen Syrian air defenses to “protect the most sensitive Syrian infrastructure facilities.”
...

 

[CrabbedOne]

 

[CrabbedOne]

 

[CrabbedOne]

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

From the Banksy exhibit in Brussels.

Anyone else notice the irony in Trump's statements about Syrian babies? He banned all those "precious babies" from entering the US because they might be terrorists.

 

[Teaboy]

From the Banksy exhibit in Brussels.

Anyone else notice the irony in Trump's statements about Syrian babies? He banned all those "precious babies" from entering the US because they might be terrorists.

How's the US press covering it? Lots of ye haw? Any negative stories out there?

 

[CrabbedOne]

From the Banksy exhibit in Brussels.

Anyone else notice the irony in Trump's statements about Syrian babies? He banned all those "precious babies" from entering the US because they might be terrorists.

Maybe he had a Damascene moment:

Or overheard Bannon calling Jared a cuck.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

How's the US press covering it? Lots of ye haw? Any negative stories out there?

Had to take a news break for my own sanity. I did check social media today and not one person is crowing about it, not even the Trump true believers. I think most people are realizing that this shit just leads to more bogged down wars, but I could be wrong. I'm sure the response will grow over the day.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On The Aviationist US military has launched 59 cruise missiles at airbase in Syria. Here’s what we know so far.

...
Did Russia’s most advanced anti-aircraft defense system detect the missiles? For sure there are no reports of any of the BGM-109 intercepted by the S-400.

Designated SA-21 “Growler” by NATO, the S-400 is believed to be able to engage all types of aerial targets including aircraft (someone says even VLO – Very Low Observable ones), drones and ballistic and cruise missiles within the range of 250 miles at an altitude of nearly 19 miles. Equipped with 3 different types of missiles and an acquisition radar capable of tracking up to 300 targets within the range of over 370 miles, the Triumph (or Triumf) is a system made of 8 launchers and a control station.

Supported by effective EW (Electronic Warfare) capabilities, the S-400 fires missiles that fly at 17,000 km/h against aerial targets.

So, at least on paper, all non-stealth aircraft and missiles would hardly be able to dodge S-400 missiles. Assuming that the Russians probably detected at least some of the Tomahawks flying fast and low towards their targets at Shayrat Airbase it’s not clear why the Trimf did not attempt to intercept any of the TLAMs launched by the US destroyers, considered the reaction by Viktor Ozerov, head of the Russian Federation Council’s defense committee, who said the American attack was “an act of aggression against a UN member […] Cooperation between the Russian and US militaries may be shut down after the US strike.” according to state news agency RIA.

Perhaps, considered that they were informed beforehand, they simply decided to let them pass. The Russian MoD statement does not say mention any Russian air defense system intercepting any of the U.S. missiles launched towards Shayrat Airbase even though some sources have suggested only 23 missiles reached their targets because the other ones were brought down near Tartous by the local S-400 and S-300 batteries.
...

 

[inva]

don't know if it's been posted somewhere already but I saw this shared via Leila al-Shami's twitter

link here for any who can't see twitter posts

it's a google doc of a large collection of links to various articles and resources (including documentaries and pdfs of books). I've not yet had a chance to look through it really myself but I thought I'd pass it on in case it is of interest to anyone.

for info, the section headings are:
regime oppression (historical + current)
stats on damage
prison torture
syrian women and state violence
civil and nonviolent defense
palestine/yarmouk
sieges
chemical weapons
syrian armed opposition
the left and syria
syrian refugees (with subsections for different countries)
syrian refugees/idps and gendered violence
interviews
primary accounts
resources (databases, statistics, media archives + more)
details on specific cities in the conflict (Dara'a, Raqqa, Damascus, Homs, Aleppo)
international community's failures

 

[Teaboy]

On The Aviationist US military has launched 59 cruise missiles at airbase in Syria. Here’s what we know so far.

Hmmm. The conspiracies continue........