Why is the West fighting for Syria?

Why is the West fighting for Syria?

By Vestnik Kavkaza

Konstantin Sivkov, first vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Captain, member of the Communist Party, has recently stated his position on the Middle East developments. He presented the situation from the point of view of a military man, but his ideas correlate with the official position of the Russian authorities.

Syria is the last point in this system, in which the West has a chance of establishing its influence and a puppet regime. Moreover, Syria, if it can defend its independence, if it will not allow the establishment of Western control or the overthrow of this regime, will mean for Western civilization something like Stalingrad for Hitler's regime. That is, it would mean the final defeat of Western strategy. The West cannot admit this, so the Western countries will fight for Syria.

The so-called unapologetic opposition is currently completely discredited. We cannot say that there are clearly-defined political forces supported by at least some part of the population which is against the government.

There is a staff, which is based in Turkey, which is made up of ethnic Syrians who have long broken their relations with Syria, who have arrived from England, France and America. Such a staff exists. There are multinational terrorist organizations, from al-Qaida to small, private organizations, which form the strike force of illegal armed groups. There is a small part of the Syrian youth who join them because of personal circumstances. This force is fighting against Syria.

On the other hand, there are the regular troops and the majority of the population of Syria, which initially have not fully supported the regime of Bashar al-Assad, and there have been quite serious protest rallies; however, having become acquainted with the "fighters for independence", with the"fighters for justice and democracy", all these people have dramatically shifted to the side of Bashar Assad and the current regime, as well as the army which has demonstrated its morale.

As a result of the large-scale strategic offensive of the militants this July-August, the first offensive got bogged down on the outskirts of Damascus and Aleppo, and they were defeated; after that they rejected the plan of laying siege to cities - not only these cities, but any other cities. They switched to purely terrorist activities. Thus, the strategy of NATO, aimed at the defeat of the Syrian regime by illegal armed groups, eventually failed. Today, NATO members have to change this strategy.

There is only one solution to the problem of Syria. This is a full-scale military operation with the participation of the regular forces of NATO. The latest provocations on the part of Turkey with the capture and forced landing of two airplanes, Armenian and Syrian, the shelling of Syrian territory by Turkey in response to the mortar shells allegedly falling into Turkey, which could be released by the militants for any provocative purposes, once again confirmed this. Such an invasion can be realized from Turkish military and strategic bases. But apparently, given that the Turks suddenly for no reason acknowledged that there was nothing illegal on board the captured Syrian airplane, the Turkish government is reluctant to get involved in it. Therefore, the situation of NATO is quite complicated now.

Given the potential of the armed forces in Syria and their willingness to fight, the defeat of the Syrian army will require the creation of a sufficiently powerful group of at least 1500 carrier-based, tactical and strategic aircraft, no less than 500 thousand ground troops, naval groups and at least several million tons of supplies in order to implement the operation and establish territorial control over Syria. Now NATO has no such opportunities. Therefore I suppose that the tension in Syria will continue to grow with various provocations. I do not rule out that with there will be several provocations concerning Turkey on the part of Syria in order to provoke Turkey to begin a war against Syria. I do not rule that out. This will be done not by the Syrians but by al-Qaeda, for example. So I guess we must watch this and monitor this closely.

As for Iran, there are a number of problems. First, the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons is a bluff. NATO members themselves say Iran cannot carry out more than more than 20% uranium enrichment. To build a nuclear bomb, it must be enriched to 95%. Iran is not so close to its building. But 20% enriched uranium rods for use in nuclear power are acceptable. Therefore, talking about Iran's nuclear program – this is just an excuse, just the same as the excuse of weapons of mass destruction of Saddam Hussein, which did not exist.

Iran is a danger to the West – it is a Shiite center, which consolidates Shiite Islam with its traditional values of Islam against the West. This means limited access to the resources of the entire region. That's what is dangerous, so they are being prepared to fight against Iran. Attacking Iran by military forces is very problematic, for the same reasons as with Syria. To do this, the West needs to create a powerful force, even more powerful than against Syria. Moreover, this group must be placed somewhere. The West needs a military-strategic base, and there is no such base near Iran, because Iraq maintains a pro-Iranian position. There are no forces required. Applying single random attacks, like in Benghazi in 1982, is meaningless. Making a strike on Iran's nuclear complex, which is for the most part located in underground pits and in mountain ranges, is also impossible for the simple reason that even the most powerful American bunker-bomb cannot ensure the destruction of such facilities, not to mention the notorious cruise missiles. They have little speed; they cannot deal strikes on such facilities. That’s why a military operation against Iran is unlikely at this stage. Only demonstrative strikes with dubious consequences for those strikes, but not for Iran, are possible. I believe that economic pressure will be the first priority. The information war against Iran will continue. And I believe that there will be intense, long, hard work to create a "fifth column" in Iran in order to overthrow the Iranian government on the model of Libya, Egypt and Tunisia.